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

Andrej Karpathy – It will take a decade to work through the issues with agents

dwarkesh.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 1001 posts

Re: Andrej Karpathy – It will take a decade to work through the issues with agents

#371

Post by pier25 »

charcircuit wrote: post #325
gtirloni wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most likely because you'll be filthy reach from selling AGI and won't need to go after secondary revenue sources.

>Most likely because you'll be filthy reach from selling AGI Why? If AGI costs more than a human or operates slower than one, it may not be economical for people to buy it. By the time it becomes economical, competitors may have also cracked it reducing your ability to charge high margins on it.

If OpenAI had anything even resembling AGI they'd be milking the shit of that, even if only for marketing.

Re: Andrej Karpathy – It will take a decade to work through the issues with agents

#372

Post by sambapa »

ctoth wrote: post #332
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your brain is doing computation with neurotransmitters instead of transistors If it is, sure. But this isn't a given. We don't actually understand how the brain computes, as evidenced by our inability to simulate it. > Evolution didn't discover some mystical process that imbues meat with special properties Sure. But the complexity remains beyond our comprehension. Against the (nearly) binary action potential of a t…

Jonas & Kording showed that neuroscience methods couldn't reverse-engineer a simple 6502 processor [0]. If the tools can't crack a system we built and fully documented, our inability to simulate brains just means we're ignorant, not that substrate is magic. It also doesn't necessarily say great things for neuroscience! And "who said this?"... come on. Searle, Dreyfus, thirty years of "syntax isn't semantics," all the…

So everyone in neuroscience is ignorant but not you?

Re: Andrej Karpathy – It will take a decade to work through the issues with agents

#374

Post by nebula8804 »

godelski wrote: post #224
ekjhgkejhgk wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The interview which I've watched recently with Rich Sutton left me with the impression that AGI is not just a matter of adding more 9s. The interviewer had an idea that he took for granted: that to understand language you have to have a model of the world. LLMs seem to udnerstand language therefore they've trained a model of the world. Sutton rejected the premise immediately. He might be right in being skeptical here…

> that to understand knowledge you have to have a model of the world. You have a small but important mistake. It's to recite (or even apply ) knowledge. To understand does actually require a world model. Think of it this way: can you pass a test without understanding the test material? Certainly we all saw people we thought were idiots do well in class while we've also seen people we thought were geniuses fail. The t…

Only problem is this time enough money is being burned that if AGI does not come, it will probably be extremely painful/fatal for a lot of people that had nothing to do with this field or the decisions being made. What will be the consequences if that comes to pass? So many lives were permanently ruined due to the GFC.

Re: Andrej Karpathy – It will take a decade to work through the issues with agents

#375

Post by Yizahi »

xboxnolifes wrote: post #357
Yizahi wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calculator can do arithmetic better than a human. Does this mean we have so called AI for half a century now?

A calculator does 1 thinking task.

First of all, it's zero thinking tasks, calculators can't think. But let's call it that way for the sake of an argument. LLM can do less than a dozen thinking tasks, and I'm generous here. Generating text, generating still images, generating digital music, generating video, and generate computer code. That's about it. Is that a complete and exhaustive list of all what constitutes a human? Or at least a human mind? If some piece of silicon can do 5-6 tasks it is a human equivalent now? (AI aka AGI presumes human mind parity)

Re: Andrej Karpathy – It will take a decade to work through the issues with agents

#376

Post by manmal »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #326
manmal wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Basically an LLM translating across languages will "light up" (to use a rough fMRI equivalent) for the same concepts (e.g. bigness) across languages I thought that’s the basic premise of how transformers work - they encode concepts into high dimensional space, and similar concepts will be clustered together. I don’t think it models the world, but just the texts it ingested. It’s observation and regurgitation, not u…

That's a model. Not a higher-order model like most humans use, but it's still a model.

Yes, not of the world, but of the ingested text. Almost verbatim what I wrote.

Re: Andrej Karpathy – It will take a decade to work through the issues with agents

#377

Post by throw4847285 »

robotresearcher wrote: post #328
compass_copium wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nonsense. A QC operator may be able to carry out a test with as much accuracy (or perhaps better accuracy, with enough practice) than the PhD quality chemist who developed it. They could plausibly do so with a high school education and not be able to explain the test in any detail. They do not understand the test in the same way as the chemist. If 'understand' is a meaningless term to someone who's spent 30 years in…

> They do not understand the test in the same way as the chemist. Can you explain precisely what 'understand' means here, without using the word 'understand'? I don't think anyone can.

There are a number of competing models. The SEP page is probably a good place to start.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/understanding

Re: Andrej Karpathy – It will take a decade to work through the issues with agents

#378

Post by Yizahi »

KeplerBoy wrote: post #361
Yizahi wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calculator can do arithmetic better than a human. Does this mean we have so called AI for half a century now?

That's how the term was sometimes used before. Think of video games AIs, those weren't (and still aren't) especially clever, but they were called AIs and nobody batted an eye at that.

When I write AI I mean what LLM apologists mean by AGI. So to rephrase I was talking about so called AGI 50 years ago in a calculator. I don't like this recent term inflation.

Re: Andrej Karpathy – It will take a decade to work through the issues with agents

#379

Post by sambapa »

asah wrote: post #210
jb1991 wrote: post #58

I would bet all of my assets of my life that AGI will not be seen in the lifetime of anyone reading this message right now. That includes anyone reading this message long after the lives of those reading it on its post date have ended. Which of course raises the interesting question of how I can make good on this bet.

Depends on the definition, I might take that bet because under some definitions were already here. Example: better than average human across many thinking tasks is done.

Good ol' Turing Test, but the real one, not the pop-sci one.
Post reply on HN