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

Measuring progress toward AGI: A cognitive framework

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 229 posts

Re: Measuring progress toward AGI: A cognitive framework

#161

Post by computably »

thinkling wrote: post #140
orangebread wrote: post #50

As an engineer who is also spiritual at the core, it seems obvious to me the missing piece: consciousness. Hear me out. I love AI and have been using it since ChatGPT 3.5. The obvious question when I first used it was "does this qualify as sentience?" The answer is less obvious. Over the next 3 years we saw EXPONENTIAL intelligence gains where intelligence has now become a commodity, yet we are still unable to determ…

Not very long ago, we thought that "life" was due to a non-material life-force thought to inhabit biological entities and thus raise what would be a biological machine to the status of living being. The Occam's Razor-logic of looking for the simplest explanation possible leads me to the hypothesis that consciousness will similarly turn out to be an emergent property of the mechanical universe [1]. It may be hard to d…

It is irrelevant whether consciousness is an "illusion." The hard problem of consciousness is why there's any conscious experience at all. The existence of the illusion, if that's what you choose to label it, is still equally as inexplicable.

Of course science may one day be able to solve the hard problem. But at this point in time, it's basically inconceivable that any methodology from any field could produce meaningful results.

Re: Measuring progress toward AGI: A cognitive framework

#162

Post by SecretDreams »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #24
pocketarc wrote: post #20

When people imagined AI/AGI, they imagined something that can reason like we can, except at the speed of a computer, which we always envisioned would lead to the singularity. In a short period of time, AI would be so far ahead of us and our existing ideas, that the world would become unrecognizable. That's not what's happening here, and it's worth remembering: A caveman from 200K years ago would have been just as int…

The amount of things LLMs can do is insane. It's interesting to me how much effort the AI companies (and bloggers) put into claiming they can do things they can't, when there's almost an unlimited list of things they actually can do.

The hype has gotta keep going or the money will dry up. And hype can be quantified by velocity and acceleration, rather than distance. They need to keep the innovation accelerating, or the money stops. This is of course completely unreasonable, but also why the odd claims keep happening.

Re: Measuring progress toward AGI: A cognitive framework

#164

Post by rl3 »

112233 wrote: post #115
rl3 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In a short period of time, AI would be so far ahead of us and our existing ideas, that the world would become unrecognizable. > That's not what's happening here ... On the contrary, it very much is. I'd argue AGI is already achieved via LLMs today, provided they've excellent external cognitive infrastructure supporting. However, the gap from AGI to ASI is perhaps longer than anticipated such that we're not seeing a…

Ah yes, the 0.50$/h support infrastructure from the places that cannot refuse the deal. "frontier" LLMs currently cosplay a dunk with google and late alzheimer's. Surely, they speed up brute-forcing correct answer a lot by trying more likely texts. And? This overfed markov chain doesn't need supporing infrastructure — it IS supporting infastructure, for the cognitive something that is not being worked on prominently,…

Pretty much, it's just that these overfed Markov chains when given a proper harness and agentic framework are able to produce entire software projects in a fraction of the time it used to take.

Kerbel AGI program hits the nail on the head.

Re: Measuring progress toward AGI: A cognitive framework

#165

Post by SkyPuncher »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #24
pocketarc wrote: post #20

When people imagined AI/AGI, they imagined something that can reason like we can, except at the speed of a computer, which we always envisioned would lead to the singularity. In a short period of time, AI would be so far ahead of us and our existing ideas, that the world would become unrecognizable. That's not what's happening here, and it's worth remembering: A caveman from 200K years ago would have been just as int…

The amount of things LLMs can do is insane. It's interesting to me how much effort the AI companies (and bloggers) put into claiming they can do things they can't, when there's almost an unlimited list of things they actually can do.

I've been pushing Opus pretty hard on my personal projects. While repeatability is very hard to do, I'm seeing glimpses of Opus being well beyond human capabilities.

I'm increasingly convinced that the core mechanism of AGI is already here. We just need to figure out how to tie it together.

Re: Measuring progress toward AGI: A cognitive framework

#166

Post by gtowey »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #24
pocketarc wrote: post #20

When people imagined AI/AGI, they imagined something that can reason like we can, except at the speed of a computer, which we always envisioned would lead to the singularity. In a short period of time, AI would be so far ahead of us and our existing ideas, that the world would become unrecognizable. That's not what's happening here, and it's worth remembering: A caveman from 200K years ago would have been just as int…

The amount of things LLMs can do is insane. It's interesting to me how much effort the AI companies (and bloggers) put into claiming they can do things they can't, when there's almost an unlimited list of things they actually can do.

Only because they have compressed and encoded the entire sum of human knowledge at their disposal. There are models for everything in there, but they can only do what has been done before.

What's more amazing to me is the average human, only able to hold a relatively small body on knowledge in their mind, can generate things that are completely novel.

Re: Measuring progress toward AGI: A cognitive framework

#168

Post by nomel »

zug_zug wrote: post #17

I'm sorry what even is this? Giving $10k rewards for significant advancements toward "AGI"? What does "making a framework" even mean, it feels like a nothing post. When I think of what real AGI would be I think: - Passes the turing test - Writes a New York Times Bestseller without revealing it was written by AI - Writes journal articles that pass peer review - Wins a Nobel Prize - Writes a successful comedy routine -…

Why does your definition of "AGI" have to exclude nearly all humans? Wouldn't it still be "AGI" if it was as smart as the average human? Since when did AGI stop representing the words that make term? Artificial (man made) General (not specific) Intelligence. Is a human not "GI"!?

Re: Measuring progress toward AGI: A cognitive framework

#169

Post by 2snakes »

torben-friis wrote: post #139
orangebread wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a tricky topic to navigate because from a materialist perspective consciousness is the side effect of biochemical mechanisms. And many will point to the brain as the obvious container of our consciousness as a bullet to the head versus the arm would demonstrate. But if a brain/intelligence is all you need to prove consciousness, then would an effectively complex set of neural networks that contained the same…

Do you have any reason to introduce that whole extra invisible, unprovable complex system? Is there anything the materialist model can not explain that you feel your model does, or is it just a case of "I don't like the alternative"?

Consciousness is fundamental in yogic cosmology (matter is not necessarily primary), and it has to be for there to be a meaningful model of reality - there is a big problem with nihilism and determinism as premature philosophical conclusions because of materialism. The only thing anyone can prove is consciousness itself because everything else comes in through energy transformations of the senses. As for things unexplained - parapsychology has high sigma results against chance. But to add direct experience for a paradigmatic shift see the goals and methods of Yoga. The rise of wisdom is indeed a wonderful thing.

Re: Measuring progress toward AGI: A cognitive framework

#170

Post by edgyquant »

SkyPuncher wrote: post #165
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The amount of things LLMs can do is insane. It's interesting to me how much effort the AI companies (and bloggers) put into claiming they can do things they can't, when there's almost an unlimited list of things they actually can do.

I've been pushing Opus pretty hard on my personal projects. While repeatability is very hard to do, I'm seeing glimpses of Opus being well beyond human capabilities. I'm increasingly convinced that the core mechanism of AGI is already here. We just need to figure out how to tie it together.

Can you give an example of something beyond the human level you’ve experienced?
Post reply on HN