Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sutskever: OpenAI board doing its mission to build AGI that benefits all

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 181 posts

Re: Sutskever: OpenAI board doing its mission to build AGI that benefits all

#161

Post by [deleted] »

windowshopping wrote: post #7
famouswaffles wrote: post #3

Tinfoil? Hat time. Everyone from Greg to Sam to Ilya keep hanging on "AGI for the benefit of humanity". According to OpenAI's constitution: AGI is explicitly carved out of all commercial and IP licensing agreements, including the ones with Microsoft. Nuclear. Well apparently, the board decides what will be AGI. But 3 (everyone now left except ilya) of those board members don't even work at Open AI and are only privy…

Anytime I hear someone even hypothesizing with a tin foil hat that some company has developed AGI today in 2023, I hear it the same way I hear someone speculating about UFOs. It's so absurd that all I can do is shake my head and look around the room hoping to make eye contact with someone sane who is wearing the same expression of raised eyebrows that I am. I could write an essay on why the existence of AGI in 2023 i…

[deleted]

Re: Sutskever: OpenAI board doing its mission to build AGI that benefits all

#162

Post by chpatrick »

insanitybit wrote: post #160
pdgenoa wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you disagree with and think you know better than the 14 people at Microsoft Research that had access to the unrestricted early GPT-4 model and wrote the white paper outlining the results of experiments with it that concluded the model showed "sparks of artificial general intelligence". That's their informed, direct conclusion after hands on with the unrestricted model. I wonder what your conclusion is based on.

Could you link me this paper? It sounds very interesting.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712

Re: Sutskever: OpenAI board doing its mission to build AGI that benefits all

#164

Post by staticman2 »

insanitybit wrote: post #158
staticman2 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That only works if you have it run a python script. If you use the non data analysis version it fails.

And? It knows how to formulate and execute that script. There are pretty hardcoded areas of our brain for doing various tasks - when we offload things to those sections are we not really "thinking" ?

I'm pointing out the disconnect in the conversation: If you say I'm not smart enough to solve a math problem, and I use a python script to solve it written by a smarter person, whether "I" solved it is a matter of interpretation.

By not discussing this I felt the above poster was leaving out some key details.

Re: Sutskever: OpenAI board doing its mission to build AGI that benefits all

#165

Post by golergka »

erkt wrote: post #32
windowshopping wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anytime I hear someone even hypothesizing with a tin foil hat that some company has developed AGI today in 2023, I hear it the same way I hear someone speculating about UFOs. It's so absurd that all I can do is shake my head and look around the room hoping to make eye contact with someone sane who is wearing the same expression of raised eyebrows that I am. I could write an essay on why the existence of AGI in 2023 i…

https://chat.openai.com/share/1b004d79-0ff3-4935-b6ca-a82833... Did you use ChatGPT 3.5 once a year ago or something? The models change often. Edit: most people would struggle to reverse a 20+ digit number if it was listed off to them. This doesn’t make them unintelligent.

Most people are pretty unintelligent. GPT-4 is already better at most of knowledge work than 50% of human population, it’s not a very high bar.

Re: Sutskever: OpenAI board doing its mission to build AGI that benefits all

#166

Post by insanitybit »

staticman2 wrote: post #164
insanitybit wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And? It knows how to formulate and execute that script. There are pretty hardcoded areas of our brain for doing various tasks - when we offload things to those sections are we not really "thinking" ?

I'm pointing out the disconnect in the conversation: If you say I'm not smart enough to solve a math problem, and I use a python script to solve it written by a smarter person, whether "I" solved it is a matter of interpretation. By not discussing this I felt the above poster was leaving out some key details.

I don't agree with the characterization of the script being written by someone else. The model is writing that script, they're just offloading execution of that script to Python.

Re: Sutskever: OpenAI board doing its mission to build AGI that benefits all

#167

Post by Jensson »

lostmsu wrote: post #120
lamp987 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. Turing test was beaten by much simpler chat bots and long before than ChatGPT (which isn't A(G)I).

It really was not, or link to the "beating" result.

It was in 2014.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/gvyy5m/how-a-computer-beat-t...

The turing test is a shit test for general intelligence, you can game it by making the AI generate a story that is more engaging than a typical boring human would do. Those stories will get much more human votes than a regular human. Some will go off track and notice it is a dumb program, but those are the minority so on average this dumb bot will pass the turing test.

Re: Sutskever: OpenAI board doing its mission to build AGI that benefits all

#168

Post by Jensson »

amai wrote: post #163

Sutskever is simply much more interested in doing research like https://openai.com/blog/introducing-superalignment than just earning money.

I can see why, being able to give hard rules the AI can't break wouldn't just solve alignment but also solve the hallucination problem. It is the kind of breakthrough that would be worth trillions.

Re: Sutskever: OpenAI board doing its mission to build AGI that benefits all

#169

Post by lostmsu »

Jensson wrote: post #167
lostmsu wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really was not, or link to the "beating" result.

It was in 2014. https://www.vice.com/en/article/gvyy5m/how-a-computer-beat-t... The turing test is a shit test for general intelligence, you can game it by making the AI generate a story that is more engaging than a typical boring human would do. Those stories will get much more human votes than a regular human. Some will go off track and notice it is a dumb program, but those are the minority so on average this dumb…

This was a severely constrained version with limited public record, so paint me skeptical.

For instance there was a 5 minute limit.

From the article:

    Simultaneous tests as specified by Alan Turing
    Each judge was involved in five parallel tests - so 10 conversations
    30 judges took part
    In total 300 conversations
    In each five minutes a judge was communicating with both a human and a machine
    Each of the five machines took part in 30 tests
    To ensure accuracy of results, Test was independently adjudicated by Professor John Barnden, University of Birmingham, formerly head of British AI Society
5 tests in 5 minutes that's just 1 minute each. In 1 minute it would be challenging to figure out you're not talking to ELIZA.

Re: Sutskever: OpenAI board doing its mission to build AGI that benefits all

#170

Post by windowshopping »

insanitybit wrote: post #156
windowshopping wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, here's another one: challenge chatgpt to send you a message consisting of a single character. I got it to do it, finally, but it took about 7 or 8 tries.

It's funny how: a) These are all so arbitrary. None of these random tasks come along with a "and failure indicates it's not AGI because..." b) ChatGPT consistently is still doing these weird, random challenges every time I try them out Is this really it? Maybe you should try an essay because this ad-hoc approach is extremely uncompelling.

I mean, what is AGI to you? What does that mean? For a quick thing I'll just copy from wikipedia:

> If realized, an AGI could learn to accomplish any intellectual task that human beings or animals can perform. Alternatively, AGI has been defined as an autonomous system that surpasses human capabilities in the majority of economically valuable tasks.

Can chatGPT do any intellectual task that human beings can perform? Of course I'm throwing tiny arbitrary things at it! I'm showing that it fails at simplistic text-based tasks, let alone GENERAL INTELLIGENCE. Can it gather wood and build a fire? Can it adjust the fire to keep it going? Can it come up with a joke? Can it create a new genre of game? Can it notice that the floor needs sweeping? Can it interrogate a prisoner and respond effectively to the tiny indications of what's working and what isn't? Can it notice when a movie is starting to go too long and lose the audience's attention? Can it fix a broken boiler? Can it do the laundry and fold all the clothes? That's what GENERAL INTELLIGENCE is. Suggesting CHATGPT, which outputs text based on a prompt, is getting close to GENERAL INTELLIGENCE - is absurd!!!

Post reply on HN