These product-focused moves feel like a tacit admission that AGI is further away than they’ve been preaching. If it was close at hand, spending precious resources on anything other than pursuing AGI wouldn’t make sense.
If we’re talking about the singularity robot takeover fast takeoff, maybe that’s true. But Sam and others have said they see AGI is an uneven process that may not have a clear finish line. The intelligence is spiky and some parts will be superhuman while other parts lag.
Dude just says whatever he thinks will make Line Go Up on his accounts. It's basically the only thing he does.
Does anyone seriously think we're anywhere close to AGI with LLMs? I know CEOs like to say things to blow smoke up investors asses, but does anyone with actual credibility think that?
to answer that you have to define AGI first
That's not a prerequisite to refute a position, no.
The ball is in the other court - if one is working on AGI, it behooves one to know what one is aiming at (and I'd stake a fair wager that OpenAI et al have at this moment very little better picture of what AGI looks like than you or I)
The reason why Apple has failed to integrate AI successfully into the iPhone isn't because we need an AI-first device, it's because AI is still universally being strategized as a solution in search of a problem. An AI-first device at this stage will fail for the same reason: it doesn't have a mission statement to solve particular problems for real people, it has a mission statement to be an AI device. The absolute be…
No. The AI pane of glass is the next killer product. The next major device won't be an ad funnel though. It'll give users first class access to the whole pane of glass. Not a managed ads experience at the will of some monopoly platform, but something where the AI serves us instead of being extractive. The minute we have a broker or agent between us and the "user is the product" services that try to advertise to us an…
I like the idea, but that kind of setup doesn't provide an infinitely growing revenue stream. Incidentally infinite growth targets are essentially why the internet looks the way it does today. That's the thing that needs fixing, product development is secondary to structural incentives.
I remain unconvinced they're (the whole LLM/"Attention Is All You Need" industry) even barking up the right tree to build anything usefully-close to "AGI".
its certainly currently useful and also generally intelligent, right?
Yes, and "that question is in not-even-wrong territory", respectively.
These product-focused moves feel like a tacit admission that AGI is further away than they’ve been preaching. If it was close at hand, spending precious resources on anything other than pursuing AGI wouldn’t make sense.
There's no post-LLM story. This consolidation is both building product and user-capture before that becomes wildly admitted.
I think LLMs will become more useful and more efficient over time as models refine but these aren't the (AI) droids you're looking for.
These product-focused moves feel like a tacit admission that AGI is further away than they’ve been preaching. If it was close at hand, spending precious resources on anything other than pursuing AGI wouldn’t make sense.
If we’re talking about the singularity robot takeover fast takeoff, maybe that’s true. But Sam and others have said they see AGI is an uneven process that may not have a clear finish line. The intelligence is spiky and some parts will be superhuman while other parts lag.
That sounds exactly what you would say if you had staked hundreds of millions of dollars and your personal reputation on something you increasingly know isn't possible.
I remain unconvinced they're (the whole LLM/"Attention Is All You Need" industry) even barking up the right tree to build anything usefully-close to "AGI".
its certainly currently useful and also generally intelligent, right?
useful, sure. like a calculator for text. intelligent? no, and neither is a calculator
These product-focused moves feel like a tacit admission that AGI is further away than they’ve been preaching. If it was close at hand, spending precious resources on anything other than pursuing AGI wouldn’t make sense.
Does anyone seriously think we're anywhere close to AGI with LLMs? I know CEOs like to say things to blow smoke up investors asses, but does anyone with actual credibility think that?
Tyler Cowen claims it's already here. I don't agree with him but he has credibility with a lot of people.