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

Mark Zuckerberg’s new goal is creating artificial general intelligence

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 362 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s new goal is creating artificial general intelligence

#271

Post by SoftTalker »

kelnos wrote: post #179
homefree wrote: post #123

The actual quote: > "Our long term vision is to build general intelligence, open source it responsibly, and make it widely available so everyone can benefit." "responsibly" is a pretty important word there that the hn title leaves out. I'm not really sure how that would be possible with a true general intelligence give the alignment problem - it's not really clear to me there's any responsible way to build a true gen…

I am not inclined to trust someone like Mark Zuckerberg to do something like this "responsibly". One look at how Facebook works (and has evolved over time) throws any credibility out the window.

You mean they believed me when I said "responsibly?" Dumb fucks.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s new goal is creating artificial general intelligence

#272

Post by rmbyrro »

konschubert wrote: post #133
homefree wrote: post #123

The actual quote: > "Our long term vision is to build general intelligence, open source it responsibly, and make it widely available so everyone can benefit." "responsibly" is a pretty important word there that the hn title leaves out. I'm not really sure how that would be possible with a true general intelligence give the alignment problem - it's not really clear to me there's any responsible way to build a true gen…

I am a general intelligence, with the knowledge of the internet at my fingertips, and I am not particularly dangerous.

You can get arrested. And you can't replicate yourself.

An AI model can't be arrested and can replicate itself almost infinitely.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s new goal is creating artificial general intelligence

#273

Post by squigz »

homefree wrote: post #187
squigz wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does irresponsibly open sourcing something look like?

Depends on the thing, detailed instructions of how to build nuclear weapons and enrich uranium is one example.

That is a question of whether or not it's responsible to open source it at all - what I'm asking is how would responsibly open sourcing something look, vs irresponsibly open sourcing the same thing.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s new goal is creating artificial general intelligence

#275

Post by edgyquant »

kevindamm wrote: post #219
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #95

My money has been on Meta for AGI since they started training people to label data for them (tag your friends!) Between all their properties they have more instrumentation on humans, collecting human behavior trajectories and state action pairs transfer learning and inverse RL than anyone - and it’s not even a close second Specifically and critically I think they likely have the largest egocentric multimodal labeled…

You are completely overlooking a few Chinese companies that have been collecting data online and IRL from a population as large (or larger) than the active users on FB.

There are >3 billion active meta users. What Chinese companies have more users than this? From a quick search tik tok has 1/3 of that

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s new goal is creating artificial general intelligence

#276

Post by edgyquant »

cheschire wrote: post #185

If only he had set this goal a year ago, maybe John Carmack wouldn't have quit to work on AGI. https://fortune.com/2022/12/17/john-carmack-leaves-meta-as-i...

More likely Carmack left because meta stopped pushing hard for the metaverse as their future and the lawsuit involving him left a bad taste in everyone’s mouth. Not sure why we’d take his declaration of building AGI seriously when he isn’t an AI researcher but a video game programmer.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s new goal is creating artificial general intelligence

#278

Post by x86x87 »

digging wrote: post #264
x86x87 wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boy, we must have a totally different understanding of whay AGI is. Intelligence is not about parroting an answer you've seen before. It's about using your environment to gain an evolutionary advantage.

> It's about using your environment to gain an evolutionary advantage. I don't think that's right either (it sounds like a description of adaptation), and I don't think your description of LLMs is fair, even though I'm fairly sure they're not AGI and won't scale to AGI. Intelligence is more like the ability to generalize skills, applying knowledge gained in one scenario to another scenario.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intelligence

the ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one's environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (such as tests)

Manipulating the environment afaik is to increase your chances of survival.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s new goal is creating artificial general intelligence

#279

Post by kevindamm »

edgyquant wrote: post #275
kevindamm wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are completely overlooking a few Chinese companies that have been collecting data online and IRL from a population as large (or larger) than the active users on FB.

There are >3 billion active meta users. What Chinese companies have more users than this? From a quick search tik tok has 1/3 of that

oh you're right, I had overestimated WeChat.. and QQ by a lot. TIL

how many of those FB and Insta accounts are bots? not zero, but probably not a billion, either

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s new goal is creating artificial general intelligence

#280

Post by edgyquant »

incrudible wrote: post #235
belltaco wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably the new bitcoin ETFs allow shorting? Taking a big short position before crashing the value sounds like a plausible attack.

Shorting Bitcoin has been possible for a decade now. The capex to pull off the would be in the billions though, and the value of that investment is tied directly to the price of Bitcoin . That said, the attack you describe has happened for much smaller cryptos. I'm not saying it can't happen, I'm saying there's no reason to assume it would be a huge threat to Bitcoin, because the actual risk for a user is vanishingly…

The question, and this thread, was entirely about if it this is enough compute to do it. Not if it was, in your opinion, a threat worth worrying about.
Post reply on HN