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

John Carmack and Rich Sutton partner to accelerate development of AGI

amii.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 226 posts

Re: John Carmack and Rich Sutton partner to accelerate development of AGI

#41

Post by falcor84 »

throwaway10965 wrote: post #20
TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #9

> partnership to bring greater focus and urgency to the creation of artificial general intelligence (AGI) Why is this urgent?

They're not saying it's urgent; they want to bring urgency - convince people to move faster. It seemed appropriate to ask AI about the meaning of the phrase: The phrase "bring urgency to something" means to inject a sense of importance and immediate attention to a specific issue, project, or situation. The aim is to motivate people to prioritize the task at hand and to act more quickly than they might otherwise.

When someone wants to "bring urgency", this generally implies that it's already quite urgent to them, so I understood this as that question.

Re: John Carmack and Rich Sutton partner to accelerate development of AGI

#42

Post by JKCalhoun »

FrustratedMonky wrote: post #38
4death4 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think that? What we can LLMs are a specific architecture that literally does predict the next token, one at a time. This isn’t the only way to generate text. Perhaps humans use a method that synthesizes all the text at once. Or some other, unimaginable way.

Not sure about everyone else, but I write one word at a time.

And often unsure about where I'm going until I get there, ha ha.

Re: John Carmack and Rich Sutton partner to accelerate development of AGI

#45

Post by simondotau »

FrustratedMonky wrote: post #38
4death4 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think that? What we can LLMs are a specific architecture that literally does predict the next token, one at a time. This isn’t the only way to generate text. Perhaps humans use a method that synthesizes all the text at once. Or some other, unimaginable way.

Not sure about everyone else, but I write one word at a time.

To be fair, I rarely write more than a sentence or two in serial form, and I have often determined the point of a sentence before I write the first few words.

Occasionally the act of writing out an idea in words clarifies or changes my mind about that idea, causing me to edit or rewrite what I’ve already written.

Re: John Carmack and Rich Sutton partner to accelerate development of AGI

#46

Post by shrimp_emoji »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #26
mark_l_watson wrote: post #13

Their focus is long running digital intelligences that interact with their environment over long periods of time. I enjoyed reading The Alberta Plan when it was released earlier this year https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.11173

Ethics/privacy aside ... I wondered the other day what the result would be if you strapped a microphone on a baby and every utterance that both the baby and mic heard was fed through speech-to-text and went toward training the baby's personal LLM . By the time the child had grown to an adult I wonder what kind of results their LLM would produce and the degree to which it might compare to what the child (now grown) wo…

Obligatory link: https://qntm.org/lena

Re: John Carmack and Rich Sutton partner to accelerate development of AGI

#47

Post by TerrifiedMouse »

volent wrote: post #28
JKCalhoun wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ethics/privacy aside ... I wondered the other day what the result would be if you strapped a microphone on a baby and every utterance that both the baby and mic heard was fed through speech-to-text and went toward training the baby's personal LLM . By the time the child had grown to an adult I wonder what kind of results their LLM would produce and the degree to which it might compare to what the child (now grown) wo…

I thought about this too. People say that LLM models are only saying the most common tokens that come after the previous token. And that this makes them incomparable to human intelligence. But Humans are basically long running LLMs that are retrained in real-time. We are the product of our environment.

Using that logic regular computers are AI too. Output is dependent on input - i.e. they are a product of their environment.

Re: John Carmack and Rich Sutton partner to accelerate development of AGI

#48

Post by cactusplant7374 »

matusp wrote: post #43

I like Carmack but is it really necessary to have a post about everytime he mentions AI (which is every week for the past year)? So far, his track record in AI research is non-existent.

It’s AGI. So far everyone’s track record is nonexistent.

Re: John Carmack and Rich Sutton partner to accelerate development of AGI

#49

Post by TedDoesntTalk »

xpe wrote: post #27
TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #9

> partnership to bring greater focus and urgency to the creation of artificial general intelligence (AGI) Why is this urgent?

Without taking a particular position on how the probabilities shake out, I suggest critically reading “What We Owe the Future” by William MacAskill and:or other long-term writings that use statistical thinking over a wide range of future scenarios.

Creator of "Centre for Effective Altruism"? Longtermism? No thanks. I thought that philosophy has been debunked as a scam after the likes of Sam Bankman and others. I mean, living unethically today in order to affect future lives positively is not for me.

Re: John Carmack and Rich Sutton partner to accelerate development of AGI

#50

Post by the_other »

FrustratedMonky wrote: post #38
4death4 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think that? What we can LLMs are a specific architecture that literally does predict the next token, one at a time. This isn’t the only way to generate text. Perhaps humans use a method that synthesizes all the text at once. Or some other, unimaginable way.

Not sure about everyone else, but I write one word at a time.

You may write one word at a time but the grammar of most languages forces their users to know what they’re going to write several words ahead of the current word.
Post reply on HN