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

Project Genie: Experimenting with infinite, interactive worlds

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 347 posts

Re: Project Genie: Experimenting with infinite, interactive worlds

#291

Post by prox »

keeeba wrote: post #288
namanyayg wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of my fundamental beliefs about the nature of consciousness. We are never able to interact with the physical world directly, we first perceive it and then interpret those perceptions. More often than not, our interpretation ignores and modifies those perceptions, so we really are just living in a world created by our own mental chatter. This is one of the core tenets of Buddhism, and it's also expounded o…

“ This is one of my fundamental beliefs about the nature of consciousness. We are never able to interact with the physical world directly, we first perceive it and then interpret those perceptions. More often than not, our interpretation ignores and modifies those perceptions, so we really are just living in a world created by our own mental chatter.” This is an orthodox position in modern philosophy, dating back to…

It’s the Allegory of the Cave, isn’t it?

Re: Project Genie: Experimenting with infinite, interactive worlds

#292

Post by krzat »

jlhawn wrote: post #167

Now I can't stop thinking about _The Experience Machine_ by Andy Clark. It theorizes that this is how humans navigate and experience the real world: Our brains generate what we think the world around is like and our senses don't so much directly process visual information but instead act like a kind of loss function for our internal simulations. Then we use that error to update our internal model of the world. In thi…

It's kinda obvious if you think about this:

- How come we have 2 eyes but see one 3d world?

- We hear sounds and music coming from various directions, but all of this is created from 2 vibrating eardrums

Re: Project Genie: Experimenting with infinite, interactive worlds

#294

Post by throw310822 »

ezst wrote: post #284
throw310822 wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For one, since last month, AI is writing about 95% of my code and that of my colleagues. I just describe what I want and how it should be implemented and the AI takes care of all the details, solves bugs, configuration issues, etc. Also I use it to research libraries, dig into documentation (and then write implementations based on that), discuss architectural alternatives, etc. Non-developers I know use them to organ…

> You really need to be obstinate in your convictions if you can dismiss LLMs at the time when everyone's job is being turned around by them. I'm factual. You are the one with the extraordinary claim that LLMs will find new substantial markets/go through transformative breakthrough. > Everywhere I look, everyone I talk to, is using LLMs And everywhere I look, I don't. It might be the case that you stand right in the…

> things that have nothing to do with LLMs/AI

These are things that have to do with intelligence. Human or LLM doesn't matter.

> things that you should NOT use LLMs for / parroting existing code / not in their training data/cut-off window, it's non-public information, they don't have the computing abilities to produce meaningful results

Sorry, but I just get the picture that you have no clue of what you're talking about- though most probably you're just in denial. This is one on the most surprising things about the emergence of AI: the existence of a niche of people that is hell-bent on denying its existence.

Re: Project Genie: Experimenting with infinite, interactive worlds

#295

Post by Gehinnn »

jlhawn wrote: post #167

Now I can't stop thinking about _The Experience Machine_ by Andy Clark. It theorizes that this is how humans navigate and experience the real world: Our brains generate what we think the world around is like and our senses don't so much directly process visual information but instead act like a kind of loss function for our internal simulations. Then we use that error to update our internal model of the world. In thi…

Doesn't this have some implications for P vs NP?

How much compute do you need to convince a brain its environment is "real"?

What happens if I build a self replicating super computer in this environment that finds solutions to some really big SAT instances that I can verify?

Dreams run into contradictions quite quickly.

Re: Project Genie: Experimenting with infinite, interactive worlds

#296

Post by Thorentis »

llmthrow0827 wrote: post #221
ollin wrote: post #28

Really great to see this released! Some interesting videos from early-access users: - https://youtu.be/15KtGNgpVnE?si=rgQ0PSRniRGcvN31&t=197 walking through various cities - https://x.com/fofrAI/status/2016936855607136506 helicopter / flight sim - https://x.com/venturetwins/status/2016919922727850333 space station, https://x.com/venturetwins/status/2016920340602278368 Dunkin' Donuts - https://youtu.be/lALGud1Ynhc?si=…

These are extremely impressive from a technological progression standpoint, and at the same time not at all compelling, in the same way AI images and LLM prose are and are not. It's neat I guess that I can use a few words and generate the equivalent of an Unreal 5 asset flip and play around in it. Also I will never do that, much less pay some ongoing compute cost for each second I'm doing it.

Exactly. People are getting so excited that all this stuff is possible, and forgetting that we are burning through innumerable finite resources just to prove something is possible.

They were too concerned with whether or not they could, they never stopped to think if they should.

Re: Project Genie: Experimenting with infinite, interactive worlds

#297

Post by postexitus »

WarmWash wrote: post #33

The actual breakthrough with Genie is being able to turn around and look back, and seeing the same scene that was there before. A few other labs have similar world simulators, but they all struggle badly with keeping coherence of things not in view. Hence why they always walk forwards and never look around.

They achieve that by not generating the scene you see, but a lens warped version of 360 degree view. So you turning the other way doesn't delete what's happening / generated on your back side. However I expect it to breakdown if you put a blocker in between and remove it. i.e. go behind a wall and come back, or enter and exit a building. Would be nice to play with.

Re: Project Genie: Experimenting with infinite, interactive worlds

#299

Post by ForceBru »

wasmainiac wrote: post #272
in-silico wrote: post #52

Everyone here seems too caught up in the idea that Genie is the product, and that its purpose is to be a video game, movie, or VR environment. That is not the goal. The purpose of world models like Genie is to be the "imagination" of next-generation AI and robotics systems: a way for them to simulate the outcomes of potential actions in order to inform decisions.

Have a source for that? I think you are anthropomorphising the AI too much. Imagination is inspired by reality, which AI does not have. Introducing a reality which the AI fully controls (looking beyond issues of vision and physics simulation) would only induce psychosis in the AI itself since false assumptions would only be amplified.

> psychosis in the AI itself

I think you're anthropomorphising the AI too much: what does it mean for an LLM to have psychosis? This implies that LLMs have a soul, or a consciousness, or a psyche. But... do they?

Speaking of reality, one can easily become philosophical and say that we humans don't exactly "have" a reality either. All we have are sensor readings. LLMs' sensors are texts and images they get as input. They don't have the "real" world, but they do have access to tons of _representations_ of this world.

Re: Project Genie: Experimenting with infinite, interactive worlds

#300

Post by ForceBru »

seydor wrote: post #287
in-silico wrote: post #52

Everyone here seems too caught up in the idea that Genie is the product, and that its purpose is to be a video game, movie, or VR environment. That is not the goal. The purpose of world models like Genie is to be the "imagination" of next-generation AI and robotics systems: a way for them to simulate the outcomes of potential actions in order to inform decisions.

Creating robots for an imaginary universe? Who needs those

The military. The robots will roam the battlefield, imagine consequences of shooting people and performing actions that maximize the probability of success according to the results of their "imagination"/simulation.
Post reply on HN