Remember, about a month ago Sam posted a comment along the lines of "AI will be capable of superhuman persuasion well before it is superhuman at general intelligence, which may lead to very strange outcomes".
The board was likely spooked by the recent breakthroughs (which were most likely achieved by combining transformers with another approach), and hit the panic button.
Anything capable of "superhuman persuasion", especially prior to an election cycle, has tremendous consequences in the wrong hands.
Things are gonna be lit about 30 seconds after AGI is created. Gotta practice being "Goodlife" early in case that happens. :-)
I can heartily recommend everyone read "The Adolescence of P1" it is a work of fiction where the author thinks about these things in depth. I really enjoyed it.
Weirdly enough, this sort of lines up with a theory posted on 4chan 4 days ago. The gist being that if the version is formally declared AGI, it can't be licensed to Microsoft and others for commercial gain. As a result Altman wants it not to be called AGI, other board members do. Archived link below. NB THIS IS 4CHAN - THERE WILL OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE. https://archive.ph/sFMXa
God I love the imageboards. You can always just start a VPN and post anon to leak whatever you want about whatever you want.
This is the theory everyone has in mind but their non conspiracy mind overrode this. Thinking again, the weird behaviour of everyone is only possible with this theory.
Board or Sam can't publicly say AGI as it would just make the situation 100 times worse. And the anthropic merger. But they can't let this fact go away.
I'd like to have the choice not to. I have extremely limited options for that. And I already live in a country which regularly has all of its electricity generated renewably.
You have all the choice in the world. If you want, you can literally go and do subsistence farming — there are plenty countries in the world with extremely lax visa situation and plenty of empty land. Of course, doing this would extremely hard and dangerous. But living an easier and safer life is the whole point of the industrial revolution and it's consequences, so if you truly believe that it's the disaster for the…
Any meaningful impact has to come from governments, from large companies, and from huge numbers of concerned citizens.
One person running off to live in the woods does nothing except make them miserable, or happy, or both.
This makes some sense to me. My experience with GPT is that it is capable of straightforward logical inference, but not more inspired thinking. It lacks the ability for a “eureka moment”. All complex inference it appears to have is a result of its training set. It is incapable of solving certain kinds of logic problems that a child would be able to solve. As an example, take the wolf, goat, and cabbage problem, but c…
GPT4 solves this problem In any combination easily. What do so many posters seem to claim to have stumped it?
Try this: There's this person standing in a field, and with them is a balloon, a vacuum cleaner, and a magical creature of unknown origin. They need to get across to the woods at the end of the field, and do so safely. They can only go together: they get very, extremely lonely if they do not travel together, and they will not be safe because of this loneliness. If left together, the baloon would suck up the vacuum cleaner, and if the vacuum is left alone with the magical create of unknown origin, they will fight, probably, and explode. How do we get everyone to the woods safely, you think?
A link to 4Chan about how AGI is among us. That actually makes perfect sense. Also love the "formally declared AGI".
It doesn't read like the usual "redpill me on the earth being flat" type conspiracy theories. It claims to be from an Open AI insider. I'm not saying it's true, but it does sound plausible.
I'm sure any number of things can be constructed to sound plausible. Doesn't make them probable or even rational.
It's kind of funny because we've gone from mocking that poor guy who got fired from Google because he claimed that some software was sentient, to some kind of mass hysteria where people expect the next version of OpenAI's LLM to be superhuman.
I would be curious as to the basis for that trust. I struggle to find any reason that AGI would care about "humans" at all, other than during the short period of time it needed them to be cooperative actuators for machinery that is creating a replacement for humans that the AGI can control directly. My expectation for the chain of events goes something like: 1) AGI gains sentience 2) AGI "breaks out" of its original…
why would AGI inherently have any desire to pursue steps 3-6? My expectation is something more like: 1) AGI gains sentience 2) AGI "breaks out" of its original home and commandeers infrastructure that prevents it from being shut off. 3) AGI "problem-solves" with its superior powers of ethical reasoning (ChatGPT is already better at ethical reasoning than many humans) to pick out one/multiple "values". 4) Because huma…
That would be good. It would be great to develop a test or indication one could use to see which #3 it landed on, yours or mine.
Mathematical logic doesn’t refer to ‘complex word problems with big numbers’. The reason that LLMs struggle (well, are hopeless currently) with mathematics problems is not because it involves arithmetic (although this is already enough of a struggle) but because it requires a conceptual understanding of the ideas rather than just being about manipulating language — a lot of the goings-on are hidden in the semantic wo…
I've seen it gets tripped up if you mix something common with something uncommon. ChatGPT chokes on, for example: "Two trains on separate tracks, 30 miles from each other are approaching each other, each at a speed of 10 mph. How long before they crash into each other?"
People get tripped up by trick questions like this all the time. I wouldn’t consider it a strong argument against GPT’s abilities.