Absolutely hilarious to assert that "everyone at OpenAI is trying to do the right thing" and then compare it to Los Alamos, the creators of the nuclear bomb.
Well, no one accused wealthy tech bros of being in touch.
Reflections on OpenAI
381–390 of 446 posts
Re: Reflections on OpenAI
#382Earlier quoted context omitted.
> IMHO, that would qualify as an AGI even though it isn't writing essays or producing business plans. I'm not sure it would, though. The "G" in AGI stands for "General", which a dog obviously can't showcase. The comparison must be done against humans, since the goal is to ultimately have the system perform human tasks. The definition mentioned by tedsanders seems adequate to me. Most of the terms are fuzzy ("most", "…
> The "G" in AGI stands for "General", which a dog obviously can't showcase. That isn't obvious to me at all. If you don't like the dog analogy, lets try another: Does a human toddler qualify as having general intelligence?
Hhmm good point.
I would say... yes. But with the strong caveat that when used within the context of AGI, the individual/system should be able to showcase that intelligence, and the results should be comparable to those of a neurotypical adult human. Both a dog and a toddler can show signs of intelligence when compared to individuals of their similar nature, but not to an adult human, which is the criteria for AGI.
This is why I don't think that a system that underperforms the average neurotypical adult human in "most" cognitive tasks would constitute AGI. It could certainly be considered a step in that direction, but not strictly AGI.
But again, I don't think that a strict definition of AGI is helpful or necessary. The impact of a system with such capabilities would be impossible to deny, so a clear definition doesn't really matter.
Re: Reflections on OpenAI
#383> As often as OpenAI is maligned in the press, everyone I met there is actually trying to do the right thing. I appreciate where the author is coming from, but I would have just left this part out. If there is anything I've learned during my time in tech (ESPECIALLY in the Bay Area) it's that the people you didn't meet are absolutely angling to do the wrong thing(TM).
I've been in circles with very rich and somewhat influential tech people and it's a lot of talk about helping others, but somehow beneath the veneer of the talk of helping others you notice that many of them are just ripping people off, doing coke and engaging in self-centered spiritual practices (especially crypto people). I also don't trust that people within the system can assess if what they're doing is good or n…
I agree. I've met some very wealthy people before and when you're outside of the bubble you start to see how $$$ helps a lot to justify anything you do as helping people. A lot of wealthy people will say "look I contribute to this cause!" as an indulgence in the religious sense to "counteract" much of what they do in their day to day or the raison d'etre of their work.
It's weird to say, but some people simply are not tuned in to the long term ramifications of their work. The "fuck you I got mine" mentality is even at play in many outwardly appearing progressive communities where short term gain is a moral imperative above doing good.
Re: Reflections on OpenAI
#384Earlier quoted context omitted.
i know calvin, and he's one of the most authentic people i've worked with in tech. this could not be more off the mark
This reflection seems very unlikely to be authentic because it is full of superlatives and not a single bad thing (or at least not great) is mentioned. Real organizations made of real humans simply are not like this. The fact that several commenters know the author personally goes some way to explain why the entire comment section seems to have missed the utterly unbalanced nature of the article.
Some teams are bad, some teams are good.
I've always heard horror stories about Amazon, but when I speak to most people at, or from Amazon, they have great things to say. Some people are just optimists, too.
Re: Reflections on OpenAI
#385Earlier quoted context omitted.
Newborns need constantly mom, not dad. Moms need husbands or their moms to help. The way it works is you agree what to do as a family (to do it or not to do it) and everybody is happy with their lives. You can be a great dad and husband and still do all of it when it makes sense and your wife supports it etc. Not having kids in the first place could be considered ego driven, not this.
Incredible that you've managed to post this from the 1950's
No, he's right. I just went through newborn phase right now and the only person that needed is mom. Kid wanted nothing to do with me. He just wanted food and sleep.
Re: Reflections on OpenAI
#386Earlier quoted context omitted.
Calvin cofounded Segment that had a $3.2B acquisition. He's not your typical employee.
So this guy is filthy rich and yet decided to grind for 14 months with a newborn at home? I guess that's why he's filthy rich.
It's unlikely he sees or even perceives what he's doing as a grind, but rather something akin to an exciting and engrossing chase or puzzle. If my mental model of these kind of Silicon Valley types is correct, neither is he likely to be in it for the money, at least not at the narrative self level. He most likely was "feelin' the AGI", in Ilya Sutskever's immortal words. I.e. feeling like this might be a once-in-a-million-years opportunity to birth a new species, if not a deity even.
Re: Reflections on OpenAI
#387Earlier quoted context omitted.
Way to go to keep the boring chores of the first months with the partner and join the fun when the little one starts to be more fun after a year. With all that cash, I'm sure they could buy a bunch of help for the partner too.
I don't know, when I became a parent I was in for the full ride, not to have someone else raising her. Yes, raising includes changing diapers and all that.
You make it sound like your choice is somehow the righteous one. I'm not convinced. What's wrong with a hiring help, as long as it's well selected? And anyway, usually the help would take care of various errands to free up mom so she can focus on her baby. But maybe they have happily involved grandparents. Maybe he was working part-time. Or maybe there's some other factor we're completely missing on right now.
Re: Reflections on OpenAI
#388I now have developed a hate with a small sprinkle of love relationship with AI.
This past week I canceled my $20 subscription to GPT, advocated my friends do the same (i got them hooked) and just will be using Gemini from now on. It can create AI maps instantly for road trip travel routes to planning creek tubing trips and more. GPT does not do maps and I was paying $20 for it while Gemini is free? Bye!
Further and more important this guy says in his blog he is happy to help with the destruction of our (white collar) society that will cause many MANY financial to emotional pain while he lives high off the hog? Impending 2030 depression .. 100 years later Im unfortunately betting!
Now AI could indeed help us cure disease but if the major are destitute while a few hundreds or so live high of the hog the benefits of AI are canceled out.
AI can definitely do the job ten people use to yet NOW its just one person typing into a text prompt to complete the tasks ten use.
Why are we here..sprinting towards this goal of destruction let China destory themselves!!!
Re: Reflections on OpenAI
#389Re: Reflections on OpenAI
#390Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is all relative. A workaholic seems pretty nice when compared to growing up with actual objectively bad parents, workaholics plus: addicts, perpetually drunk, gamblers, in jail, no shows for everything you put time into, competing with you when obtaining basic skills, abusing you for being a kid, etc. There are plenty worse than that. The storied dramatic fiction parent missing out on a kid's life is much better t…
Im very interested in that topic and haven’t made up my mind about what really counts in parenting. You have sources for the claim about well-being (asking explicitly about mental well-being and not just material well-being) being more influenced by socioeconomic status and not so much by parental absence? About the guy: I think if it’s just a one time thing it’s ok but the way he presents himself gives reason for do…
A parent should provide their kids with opportunities to try new things. Sometimes this might require gently making a kid do something at least a few times until it's clear it's not something they are good at or interested in. Also deciding when to try something is important - kids might need to try it at different ages. And of course convincing and reassuring a kid might be necessary to try something they are afraid to do. Until the age of 12 or so, it's important to make it fun, at least initially.
It's debatable whether a parent always needs to "lead by example": for example, I've never played hockey, but I introduced my son to it, and he played for a while (until injuries made us reconsider and he stopped). For mental well-being, make sure to not display your worst emotions in front of your kids - they will definitely notice, and will probably carry it for the rest of their lives.