Or it makes it AI in the broad sense, but not AGI. Maybe it's time to borrow "Virtual Intelligence" terminology from Mass Effect - something that's 'smart' but that doesn't have its own true volition or ability to materially self-improve.
How do you know what volitions and abilities it doesn’t have? My agent teams continually improve the process and tooling they use for teamwork
If it had its own volition, the various "You are X role and do Y" prompts wouldn't work.
Or it makes it AI in the broad sense, but not AGI. Maybe it's time to borrow "Virtual Intelligence" terminology from Mass Effect - something that's 'smart' but that doesn't have its own true volition or ability to materially self-improve.
The goal posts keep changing. First it was, it's not intelligent if it can't come up with something new. Now it has to seek out self help literature
The goalposts keep moving because people once upon a time thought that "able to perform tasks intelligently" and "able to take the role of a person" were the same thing, and task by task that turned out to be entirely false.
As a Catholic in AI, this has been my take since the day I started in Industry. Techies have a weird way of thinking themselves world saviors and having poor binary decision making ability. AI will never be alive or have a soul. No machine could have a human rational eternal soul. This is Catholicism 101. No amount of work on matrix multiplication will change that.
> Techies have a weird way of thinking themselves world saviors and having poor binary decision making ability. rich coming from a belief system that thinks everyone who had the opportunity to go through their water-dunking ritual and culpably didn't is automatically going to be tortured in the underworld for eternity.
As a non-Catholic, this shows such a poor grasp on what makes Catholicism different from Protestantism that it’s comical. Some early Calvinists, for example, said that Catholics were wrong because they DIDN’T believe that. It would have taken you so little effort to uncover your lack of understanding before broadcasting it to the world.
It could be a diffusion model with a latent model of what needs to be said that will generate whole message or coversation (progressively) at once. Although I love how next token prediction leads to text showing up gradually, in case of local models, accompanied by modulated coil whine of my GPU. It's how the 80s shown us the intelligent computers should communicate.
Aren't they already doing that though? And it turned out to be equivalent to a next-token-predictor.
This could be a strong signal that it's actually intelligence since it's all equivalent.
> Techies have a weird way of thinking themselves world saviors and having poor binary decision making ability. rich coming from a belief system that thinks everyone who had the opportunity to go through their water-dunking ritual and culpably didn't is automatically going to be tortured in the underworld for eternity.
As a non-Catholic, this shows such a poor grasp on what makes Catholicism different from Protestantism that it’s comical. Some early Calvinists, for example, said that Catholics were wrong because they DIDN’T believe that. It would have taken you so little effort to uncover your lack of understanding before broadcasting it to the world.
They think a next token predictor model is alive or can become AGI/ASI. Altman talked about making a religion. Amodei talks about "building a God" and meets with religious leaders (including the Vatican). I'm convinced these CEOs have "AI psychosis" [1]. LLMs are extremely powerful pseudo-AI and will bring a pseudo-singularity, but they are not true AI [2] and a human at the wheel is still needed for the foreseeable…
I am getting tired of hearing "next token predictor" from carbon-based facial expression predictors. You are saying this like an argument which allows somehow estimate upper bound of possible influence of these entities. And I do not see how this help to make predictions. It sounds to me like saying "but air is just molecules bobbing around". OK, that's true, but does it help calculate wing aerodynamic profile? Yup,…
Imagine the dependency humanity has on such a technology, after 1/4 of a generation of time has passed- and all the students grew up with "I dont have to know anything"
I am getting tired of hearing "next token predictor" from carbon-based facial expression predictors. You are saying this like an argument which allows somehow estimate upper bound of possible influence of these entities. And I do not see how this help to make predictions. It sounds to me like saying "but air is just molecules bobbing around". OK, that's true, but does it help calculate wing aerodynamic profile? Yup,…
Imagine the dependency humanity has on such a technology, after 1/4 of a generation of time has passed- and all the students grew up with "I dont have to know anything"
It’s more like:
I don’t have to know the stuff people previously had to know, but I have to know a bunch of new things people didn't need to know in the past.