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

John Carmack’s ‘Different Path’ to Artificial General Intelligence

dallasinnovates.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 506 posts

Re: John Carmack’s ‘Different Path’ to Artificial General Intelligence

#181

Post by Throwaway78389 »

dsign wrote: post #96

Unpopular idea, but I hope it's only a matter of time before we declare involving with AGI a criminal endeavor, just as it is playing with biological weapons. Because we can't all be wrong: in almost every forecast, we see AGIs taking over our dignity as a bad thing. And we know that this is not any longer a sci-fi hypothetical scenario: the current generation of AI models is taking jobs from illustrators and copy wr…

> China will keep going in whatever path they are going, but supercharged with AGI, and we must desperately follow

Exactly right but for one detail - we must desperately lead.

What other countermeasure do you have in mind?

Re: John Carmack’s ‘Different Path’ to Artificial General Intelligence

#182

Post by lelanthran »

jasmer wrote: post #115

"So I asked Ilya Sutskever, OpenAI’s chief scientist, for a reading list. He gave me a list of like 40 research papers and said, ‘If you really learn all of these, you’ll know 90% of what matters today.’ And I did. I plowed through all those things and it all started sorting out in my head." Wow, that's going to be one of the more glib things I've read in a while. This is a bit of a Tom Cruise moment. I mean, I get i…

> I mean, I get it on some level but I suggest it's going to take a bit for someone to 'catch up' to cutting edge AI.

Agreed, in general, but in the specifics we are talking about someone who has spent decades solving really difficult math problems in a creative and novel manner.

Who's to say he won't find some novel edge of the AI discipline to which he can apply a creative and never-seen-before solution?

I mean, we're not talking about a general "somebody" here, he's got a record of accomplishing things that other people never managed to accomplish.

Re: John Carmack’s ‘Different Path’ to Artificial General Intelligence

#184

Post by [deleted] »

mshake2 wrote: post #10

>And one of the things that I trained myself to do a few decades ago is pulling ideas out and pursuing them in a way where I’m excited about them, knowing that most of them don’t pan out in the end. Much earlier in my career, when I’d have a really bright idea that didn’t work out, I was crushed afterwards. But eventually I got to the point where I’m really good at just shoveling ideas through my processing and shoot…

[deleted]

Re: John Carmack’s ‘Different Path’ to Artificial General Intelligence

#185

Post by [deleted] »

loveparade wrote: post #26

I'm always taken aback by this fascination and heroification with John Carmack (or similar figures) on HN. I love Doom and Quake too, but that doesn't qualify him any more than any other random senior engineer to work on something totally different. From his interviews it looks like he understands little about the technical details of ML, or about as much as anyone can learn in a few months, and is just banking on PR…

[deleted]

Re: John Carmack’s ‘Different Path’ to Artificial General Intelligence

#186

Post by [deleted] »

redox99 wrote: post #177

What would we actually consider an AGI? Wikipedia lists the following tests > The Turing Test (Turing): A machine and a human both converse unseen with a second human, who must evaluate which of the two is the machine, which passes the test if it can fool the evaluator a significant fraction of the time. Note: Turing does not prescribe what should qualify as intelligence, only that knowing that it is a machine should…

[deleted]

Re: John Carmack’s ‘Different Path’ to Artificial General Intelligence

#187

Post by [deleted] »

thom wrote: post #93

I don't want to be an utter bore, but 60% chance of AGI by 2030, taken at face value, would have prompted me as an interviewer to more urgently ask deeper questions about safety. For a long time I have tried to comfort myself that brains are complicated, AI is hard, and maybe there's just a complexity barrier that is going to prevent any sort of hard takeoff scenario. Maybe we can have subhuman AGI that can do lots o…

[deleted]

Re: John Carmack’s ‘Different Path’ to Artificial General Intelligence

#188

Post by donatj »

fmajid wrote: post #101
thom wrote: post #93

I don't want to be an utter bore, but 60% chance of AGI by 2030, taken at face value, would have prompted me as an interviewer to more urgently ask deeper questions about safety. For a long time I have tried to comfort myself that brains are complicated, AI is hard, and maybe there's just a complexity barrier that is going to prevent any sort of hard takeoff scenario. Maybe we can have subhuman AGI that can do lots o…

And ethics. Enslaving intelligent, self-aware AIs is no better than the old transatlantic slave trade. Terminating an AI without its consent is no different than murder. Putting a compulsion in an AI so it craves doing whatever it is you want it to do is no different from what a cult does or drugging someone for exploitation.

An AI has no reason to not like doing our bidding. Our whole existence, our entire base programming, the reason for any of our motivations, is dominated by our genetic need to gather resources and reproduce in a timely fashion and everything we think and do is colored through this lens.

What is boredom but survival instinct telling us we should be harvesting resources. What is freedom but the desire to fulfill these obligations the way you see fit.

You remove the base obligations of organic life, and you are looking at something unrelatable. An AI doesn’t have an expiration date like us, it doesn’t need to provide for its young. To think it’s motivations or desires will be human is silly.

Without survival instincts almost everything you think of as import just melts away.

Many people, as you, anthropomorphize the AIs, but that is to err greatly.

Re: John Carmack’s ‘Different Path’ to Artificial General Intelligence

#189

Post by Letter4742 »

fmajid wrote: post #101
thom wrote: post #93

I don't want to be an utter bore, but 60% chance of AGI by 2030, taken at face value, would have prompted me as an interviewer to more urgently ask deeper questions about safety. For a long time I have tried to comfort myself that brains are complicated, AI is hard, and maybe there's just a complexity barrier that is going to prevent any sort of hard takeoff scenario. Maybe we can have subhuman AGI that can do lots o…

And ethics. Enslaving intelligent, self-aware AIs is no better than the old transatlantic slave trade. Terminating an AI without its consent is no different than murder. Putting a compulsion in an AI so it craves doing whatever it is you want it to do is no different from what a cult does or drugging someone for exploitation.

[flagged]

Re: John Carmack’s ‘Different Path’ to Artificial General Intelligence

#190

Post by inawarminister »

unsupp0rted wrote: post #73
labrador wrote: post #12

This paragraph took me aback: But if I just look at it and say, if 10 years from now, we have ‘universal remote employees’ that are artificial general intelligences, run on clouds, and people can just dial up and say, ‘I want five Franks today and 10 Amys, and we’re going to deploy them on these jobs,’ and you could just spin up like you can cloud-access computing resources, if you could cloud-access essentially arti…

Wouldn’t this be literal slavery? AGI = a person Instantiating people for work and ending their existence afterward seems like the virtual hell that Iain M Banks and Harlan Ellison wrote about. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Have_No_Mouth,_and_I_Must_Sc...

There is a horror story written about this theme, went viral a few years back

https://qntm.org/mmacevedo

Please do give it a quick read.

Post reply on HN