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

You are the scariest monster in the woods

jamie.ideasasylum.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 405 posts

Re: You are the scariest monster in the woods

#191

Post by BoxOfRain »

foxyv wrote: post #83
boole1854 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anyone knows of a steelman version of the "AGI is not possible" argument, I would be curious to read it. I also have trouble understanding what goes into that point of view.

I think the best argument against us ever finding AGI is that the search space is too big and the dead ends are too many. It's like wandering through a monstrously huge maze with hundreds of very convincingly fake exits that lead to pit traps. The first "AGI" may just be a very convincing Chinese room that kills all of humanity before we can ever discover an actual AGI. The necessary conditions for "Kill all Humanity…

Is there a plausible situation where a humanity-killing superintelligence isn't vulnerable to nuclear weapons?

If a genuine AGI-driven human extinction scenario arises, what's to stop the world's nuclear powers from using high-altitude detonations to produce a series of silicon-destroying electromagnetic pulses around the globe? It would be absolutely awful for humanity don't get me wrong, but it'd be a damn sight better than extinction.

Re: You are the scariest monster in the woods

#192

Post by alt227 »

jncfhnb wrote: post #188
MountDoom wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think you could make AGI right now tbh. Seems like you figured out a simple method. Why not go for it? It's a free Nobel prize at the very least.

Will you pay for my data center and operating costs?

Why not go and hit up OpenAI and tell them you've solved AGI and ask for a job and see what they say?

Re: You are the scariest monster in the woods

#193

Post by bob1029 »

whycombinetor wrote: post #17

"We (humans) are the scariest animal in the woods. We’re the scariest animal anywhere. At any time, in any location, under any circumstances, if there’s a human present then that’s the scariest motherfucker in the woods." Has this guy not heard of the Bengal tigers of the Sundarban forests, which kill ~50 humans per year? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_attacks_in_the_Sundarban...

A desperately hungry tiger might go for a human, but on average they are not interested in that fight. They would much prefer going for something like deer. The calories per unit of risk are much higher with non-human food sources. Wildlife tends to be very efficient at this economy.

Anything smaller than a human is absolutely terrified of us. I used to be afraid of things like snakes and spiders, but they want nothing to do with humans. They will get the hell out of your way when you are walking through the woods. You have to do something really stupid to get bitten. Keeping animals as pets is where most of the trouble happens.

Re: You are the scariest monster in the woods

#194

Post by potsandpans »

theodorejb wrote: post #187
myrmidon wrote: post #13

I struggle to understand how people can just dismiss the possibility of artificial intelligence. Human cognition was basically bruteforced by evolution-- why would it be impossible to achieve the exact same result in silicon, especially after we already demonstrated some parts of those results (e.g. use of language) that critically set us apart from other animals? I'm not buying the whole "AI has no agency" line eith…

> Human cognition was basically bruteforced by evolution This is an assumption, not a fact. Perhaps human cognition was created by God, and our minds have an essential spiritual component which cannot be reproduced by a purely physical machine.

Maybe there's a small teapot orbiting the earth, with ten thousand angels dancing on the tip of the spout.

Re: You are the scariest monster in the woods

#195

Post by [deleted] »

theodorejb wrote: post #187
myrmidon wrote: post #13

I struggle to understand how people can just dismiss the possibility of artificial intelligence. Human cognition was basically bruteforced by evolution-- why would it be impossible to achieve the exact same result in silicon, especially after we already demonstrated some parts of those results (e.g. use of language) that critically set us apart from other animals? I'm not buying the whole "AI has no agency" line eith…

> Human cognition was basically bruteforced by evolution This is an assumption, not a fact. Perhaps human cognition was created by God, and our minds have an essential spiritual component which cannot be reproduced by a purely physical machine.

[deleted]

Re: You are the scariest monster in the woods

#197

Post by jjtheblunt »

woeirua wrote: post #44

There's this weird disconnect in tech circles, where everyone is deathly afraid of AGI, but totally asleep on the very real possibility of thermonuclear war breaking out in Europe or Asia over the next 10 years. There's already credible evidence that we came perilously close to the use of tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine which likely would've spiraled out of control. AGI might happen, but the threat of nuclear war…

> credible evidence that we came perilously close to the use of tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine

I've not seen that. can you link to it?

Re: You are the scariest monster in the woods

#198

Post by aniviacat »

messe wrote: post #190
Aerroon wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not buying the whole "AI has no agency" line either; this might be true for now, but this is already being circumvented with current LLMs (by giving them web access etc). They don't have agency, because they don't have persistent state. They're like a function that you can query and get an answer. During that answer the LLM has state, but once it's done the state is gone. Humans (and other "agents") have persis…

> They don't have agency, because they don't have persistent state. They're like a function that you can query and get an answer. During that answer the LLM has state, but once it's done the state is gone. That's solved by the simplest of agents. LLM + ability to read / write a file.

But they can only change their context, not the model itself. Humans update their model whenever they receive new data (which they do continuously).

A live-learning AI would be theoretically possible, but so far it hasn't been done (in a meaningful way).

Re: You are the scariest monster in the woods

#199

Post by alt227 »

robertlagrant wrote: post #56
armada651 wrote: post #24

> Just like a hammer, sword, or a rifle lying on a ground is nothing to be feared, so too is AI. It’s just an inanimate object; a tool, potentially. A bomb is an inanimate object too, but if you find some unexploded ordnance lying on the ground you should fear it.

An unexploded bomb definitely has the potential to be highly animate. It's just not currently animate.

As does AI.

Re: You are the scariest monster in the woods

#200

Post by pennomi »

theodorejb wrote: post #187
myrmidon wrote: post #13

I struggle to understand how people can just dismiss the possibility of artificial intelligence. Human cognition was basically bruteforced by evolution-- why would it be impossible to achieve the exact same result in silicon, especially after we already demonstrated some parts of those results (e.g. use of language) that critically set us apart from other animals? I'm not buying the whole "AI has no agency" line eith…

> Human cognition was basically bruteforced by evolution This is an assumption, not a fact. Perhaps human cognition was created by God, and our minds have an essential spiritual component which cannot be reproduced by a purely physical machine.

It’s not an assumption, it’s a viable theory based on overwhelming evidence from fossil records.

What’s NOT supported by evidence is an unknowable, untestable spiritual requirement for cognition.

Post reply on HN