Live data from Hacker News

The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines

mlumiste.com

31–40 of 411 posts

Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines

#31

""" I resigned from OpenAI. I care deeply about the Robotics team and the work we built together. This wasn’t an easy call. AI has an important role in national security. But surveillance of Americans without judicial oversight and lethal autonomy without human authorization are lines that deserved more deliberation than they got. This was about principle, not people. I have deep respect for Sam and the team, and I’m…

[flagged]

Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines

#32

Purely anecdotal, but GPT 5.4 has been better than Opus 4.6 this past week or so since it came out. It’s interesting to see it rank fairly low on that table. Opus “talks” better and produces nicer output (or, it renders better Markdown in OpenCode) than 5.4.

Chatbot Arena is notoriously unreliable for several reasons. First it's (at least in theory) based on normal human feedback. Given by normal people's current voting trends, they clearly are not very good at identifying experts or at least remotely correct statements. Second, the leaderboards are gamed hard by the big companies. Even ARC AGI entered the actively gamed stage by now. Sure the current gen models are certainly better than the last and if two are vastly different in leaderboards there may be something fundamental to it, but there is hardly any reason to use these kinds of comparison tables for anything useful among the latest models.

Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines

#33

""" I resigned from OpenAI. I care deeply about the Robotics team and the work we built together. This wasn’t an easy call. AI has an important role in national security. But surveillance of Americans without judicial oversight and lethal autonomy without human authorization are lines that deserved more deliberation than they got. This was about principle, not people. I have deep respect for Sam and the team, and I’m…

[flagged]

It's you.

Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines

#36

""" I resigned from OpenAI. I care deeply about the Robotics team and the work we built together. This wasn’t an easy call. AI has an important role in national security. But surveillance of Americans without judicial oversight and lethal autonomy without human authorization are lines that deserved more deliberation than they got. This was about principle, not people. I have deep respect for Sam and the team, and I’m…

[flagged]

[deleted]

Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines

#37

""" I resigned from OpenAI. I care deeply about the Robotics team and the work we built together. This wasn’t an easy call. AI has an important role in national security. But surveillance of Americans without judicial oversight and lethal autonomy without human authorization are lines that deserved more deliberation than they got. This was about principle, not people. I have deep respect for Sam and the team, and I’m…

[flagged]

This person simply does not want to be involved in making autonomous killing machines. What does that have to do with trans?

Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines

#38

""" I resigned from OpenAI. I care deeply about the Robotics team and the work we built together. This wasn’t an easy call. AI has an important role in national security. But surveillance of Americans without judicial oversight and lethal autonomy without human authorization are lines that deserved more deliberation than they got. This was about principle, not people. I have deep respect for Sam and the team, and I’m…

I 100% understand and agree the AI community argument around lethal autonomy.

But I am trying to understand this from the perspective of defence & govt. Why is it so business as usual for them? Do they consider this at par with missiles with infra-red/heat sensors for tracking/locking? Where does the definition of lethal autonomy begin and end?

Just putting this out there as a point to ponder on. By itself, this may rightly be too broad and should be debated.

Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines

#39
" if a value-aligned, safety-conscious project " and which project is that?

Are you sure Anthropic isn't aware of this and angling for this? And are you sure what Anthropic say is really value-aligned and safety concious? The PR bit surely is working right?

Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines

#40
post #28

"Artificial general intelligence (AGI) is a type of artificial intelligence that matches or surpasses human capabilities across virtually all cognitive tasks." [Wikipedia] One can argue that they have already achieved this. At least for short termed tasks. Humans are still better at organization, collaboration and carrying out very long tasks like managing a project or a company.

> One can argue that they have already achieved this.

No, because they're hugely reliant on their training data and can't really move beyond their training data. This is why you haven't seen an explosion of new LLM-aided scientific discoveries, why Suno can't write a song in a new genre (even if you explain it to Suno in detail and give it actual examples,) etc.

This should tell you something enormous about (1) their future potential and (2) how their "intelligence" is rooted in essentially baseline human communications.

Admittedly LLMs are superhuman in the performance of tasks which are, for want of a better term, "conventional" -- and which are well-represented in their training data.

Post reply on HN