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

Why I don't think AGI is imminent

dlants.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 313 posts

Re: Why I don't think AGI is imminent

#241

Post by lostmsu »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #105
lostmsu wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To my knowledge Turing test has not been blown out of the water. The forms I saw were time limited and participants were not pushed hard to interrogate.

You have no idea whether you're talking to an LLM right now, and neither do I. That's good enough for me.

I dunno, I am rather certain your comment was not made by an LLM. Moreover I am certain you knew my wasn't either.

And that's before the interrogation, which is the entire point of the test.

IMO, Turing test stands, but the experience you are referring to is basically a sub-human form of AGI.

Re: Why I don't think AGI is imminent

#242

Post by keernan »

hi_hi wrote: post #63

Here's a thought. Lets all arbitrarily agree AGI is here. I can't even be bothered discussing what the definition of AGI is. It's just here, accept it. Or vice versa. Now what....? Whats happening right now that should make me care that AGI is here (or not). Whats the magic thing thats happening with AGI that wasn't happening before? Right, so, not much has changed from 1-2 years ago that I can tell. The job markets…

One of the most impactful books I ever read was Alvin Toffler's Future Shock.

Its core thesis was: Every era doubled the amount of technological change of the prior era in one half the time.

At the time he wrote the book in 1970, he was making the point that the pace of technological change had, for the first time in human history, rendered the knowledge of society's elders - previously the holders of all valuable information - irrelevant.

The pace of change has continued to steadily increase in the ensuing 55 years.

Edit: grammar

Re: Why I don't think AGI is imminent

#243

Post by CamperBob2 »

lostmsu wrote: post #241
CamperBob2 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have no idea whether you're talking to an LLM right now, and neither do I. That's good enough for me.

I dunno, I am rather certain your comment was not made by an LLM. Moreover I am certain you knew my wasn't either. And that's before the interrogation, which is the entire point of the test. IMO, Turing test stands, but the experience you are referring to is basically a sub-human form of AGI.

It's crystal-clear that a model that was trained specifically to fool expert interrogators in a Turing test would, in fact, be able to do so. You'd have to sandbag the model just to keep it from tipping its hand by being too good.

We don't have any such models right now, AFAIK, so we can't run such a test. They wouldn't be much good for anything else, and would likely spark ethical concerns due to potential for misuse. But I have no doubt that it's possible to train for the Turing test.

Re: Why I don't think AGI is imminent

#244

Post by 4star3star »

greedo wrote: post #92
esafak wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's already like that; models are better than many workers, and I'm supervising agents. I'd rather have the model than numerous juniors; esp. the kind that can't identify the model's mistakes.

The problem becomes your retirement. Sure, you've earned "expert" status, but all the junior developers won't be hired, so they'll never learn from junior mistakes. They'll blindly trust agents and not know deeper techniques.

We are currently at a point where the master furniture craftsmen are doing quality assurance at the new automated furniture factory. Eventually, everyone working at the factory will have never made any furniture by hand and will have grown up sitting on janky chairs, and they will be the ones supervising.

Re: Why I don't think AGI is imminent

#245

Post by lostmsu »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #243
lostmsu wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dunno, I am rather certain your comment was not made by an LLM. Moreover I am certain you knew my wasn't either. And that's before the interrogation, which is the entire point of the test. IMO, Turing test stands, but the experience you are referring to is basically a sub-human form of AGI.

It's crystal-clear that a model that was trained specifically to fool expert interrogators in a Turing test would, in fact, be able to do so. You'd have to sandbag the model just to keep it from tipping its hand by being too good. We don't have any such models right now, AFAIK, so we can't run such a test. They wouldn't be much good for anything else, and would likely spark ethical concerns due to potential for misus…

I mean is it though? The top reasoning models suggest to walk to a car wash.

Re: Why I don't think AGI is imminent

#246

Post by pixl97 »

JSDave wrote: post #65
pixl97 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that is ASI. No human can do all intellectual work themselves. You have millions of different human models based on roughly the same architecture to do that. When you have a single model that can do all you require, you are looking at something that can run billions of copies of itself and cause an intelligence explosion or an apocalypse.

"Artificial general intelligence (AGI) is a type of artificial intelligence that matches or surpasses human capabilities across virtually all cognitive tasks."

This is a statement that I've always found to be circular and poorly defined for the other reasons I've listed. Any technology that even gets close isn't AGI like I said, it's ASI for the reasons of duplication and time to train.

It is also a line of thinking that will bite us in the ass if humans aren't as general of thinkers as we make ourselves out to be.

Re: Why I don't think AGI is imminent

#247

Post by DangitBobby »

al_borland wrote: post #229
nsainsbury wrote: post #33

I used to also believe along these lines but lately I'm not so sure. I'm honestly shocked by the latest results we're seeing with Gemini 3 Deep Think, Opus 4.6, and Codex 5.3 in math, coding, abstract reasoning, etc. Deep Think just scored 84.6% on ARC-AGI-2 ( https://deepmind.google/models/gemini/ )! And these benchmarks are supported by my own experimentation and testing with these models ~ specifically most recent…

> These models are demonstrating an incredible capacity for logical abstract reasoning of a level far greater than 99.9% of the world's population. And yet they have trouble knowing that a person should take their car to a car wash. I also saw a college professor who put various AI models through all his exams for a freshman(?) level class. Most failed, I think one barely passed, if I remember correctly. I’ve been re…

> And yet they have trouble knowing that a person should take their car to a car wash.

SotA models don't.

Re: Why I don't think AGI is imminent

#249

Post by DangitBobby »

lostmsu wrote: post #245
CamperBob2 wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's crystal-clear that a model that was trained specifically to fool expert interrogators in a Turing test would, in fact, be able to do so. You'd have to sandbag the model just to keep it from tipping its hand by being too good. We don't have any such models right now, AFAIK, so we can't run such a test. They wouldn't be much good for anything else, and would likely spark ethical concerns due to potential for misus…

I mean is it though? The top reasoning models suggest to walk to a car wash.

The top reasoning models suggest taking a car to the car wash.

Re: Why I don't think AGI is imminent

#250

Post by the1st »

materielle wrote: post #93
hackyhacky wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cultural changes take time. It took decades for the internet to move from nerdy curiosity to an essential part of everyone's life. The writing is on the wall. Even if there's no new advances in technology, the current state is upending jobs, education, media, etc

I really think corporations are overplaying their hand if they think they can transform society once again in the next 10 years. Rapid de industrialization followed by the internet and social media almost broke our society. Also, I don’t think people necessarily realize how close we were to the cliff in 2007. I think another transformation now would rip society apart rather than take us to the great beyond.

I'm still not buying that AI will change society anywhere as much as the internet or smart phones for the matter.

The internet made it so that you can share and access information in a few minute if not seconds.

Smart phones build on the internet by making this sharing and access of information could done from anywhere and by anyone.

AI seems occupies the same space as google in the broader internet ecosystem.I dont know what AI provides me that a few hours of Google searches. It makes information retrieval faster, but that was the never the hard part. The hard part was understanding the information, so that you're able to apply it to your particalar situation.

Being able to write to-do apps X1000 faster is not innovation!

Post reply on HN