Open source paperclip maximizer as a service
Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment
61–70 of 178 posts
Re: Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
Language models obviously have some form of intelligence right now. You can have GPT-4 take SAT tests, play Chess, write poetry, predict what will happen in different social scenarios, answer theory of mind questions, ask questions, solve programming puzzles, etc. There are some measures that GPTs are clearly below human levels, some where they are far beyond, and some where they are within human range. The question…
> Language models obviously have some form of intelligence right now. This is not "obvious" in any sense of the word. At best, it's highly debatable.
Would you settle for "behave exactly as if they had some form of intelligence"?
Because from where I sit it's a distinction without a meaningful difference.
Re: Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
At some point someone will leak it or they will get breached, the stakes are very high.
Depends on the size of the model/weights. If it's 1TB or more, being able to exfiltrate it from wherever it is to a local machine will be hard to do unnoticed, if the company security team has even a iota of knowledge and experience.
Bit of an aside here but it's amazing to think this thing could fit on a $30 hard drive.
Re: Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment
#64AI needn't even try to escape, the clueless humans will plug it into reallity by themselves. Given this totally expected attitude I hope that the base models will never be released to the general population.
well yeah lol. giving LLMs "do whatever you want and run forever" agency while interacting with other systems is all things considered pretty easy. so it'll definitely be done.
There is the risk you end up with massive API usage fees as well as interesting potential legal liabilities if you go down this route.
Re: Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can someone explain to me what is so dangerous here? Do people actually think we’re headed towards James Cameron’s terminator and soon ChatGPT will become self aware and destroy us? I am far more afraid of tools to edit viruses becoming cheap and widely available, then one nutjob in his garage can engineer and release smallpox v2.0 and wipe out 90% of the worldwide population before we even know what hit us. Or you k…
The problem is, human intelligence is likely also based on a similar advanced chat bot setup. While GPT-4 only performs as good as top-10th percentile of human students taking an exam (a professional in the field can do much more than this), it is notable that as a generalist GPT-4 would outperform such professionals. And GPT-4 is much faster than a human. And we have not yet evaluated GPT-4 working in its optimal se…
But where is the imminent danger? It is still limited in many ways. For example, it can be turned off or unplugged.
Is it because CAPTCHAs won’t work anymore? That sounds like a problem for sites like Twitter that have bot problems.
Is it because it may replace people’s jobs? That comes with every technological step forward and there’s always alarmist ludditism to accompany it.
Is it because bad people will use it to do bad things? Again, that comes with every new technology and that’s a law enforcement problem.
I don’t really see what the imminent danger is, just sounds like the first few big players trying to create a regulatory moat and lock out potential new upstarts. Or they’re just distracting regulators from something else, like maybe antitrust enforcement.
Re: Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment
#66I've been using GPT-4 extensively for programming and its consistent failures at novel tasks have kind of left me less excited.
I've found this too. It confidently generates something for you... which turns out to be no good if it's in any way different from standard stuff. And making that leap from just a mash up of copy-pasta code to actual understanding... is huge. It wouldn't be an incremental upgrade, but a fundamental change in approach.
Re: Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can someone explain to me what is so dangerous here? Do people actually think we’re headed towards James Cameron’s terminator and soon ChatGPT will become self aware and destroy us? I am far more afraid of tools to edit viruses becoming cheap and widely available, then one nutjob in his garage can engineer and release smallpox v2.0 and wipe out 90% of the worldwide population before we even know what hit us. Or you k…
The problem is, human intelligence is likely also based on a similar advanced chat bot setup. While GPT-4 only performs as good as top-10th percentile of human students taking an exam (a professional in the field can do much more than this), it is notable that as a generalist GPT-4 would outperform such professionals. And GPT-4 is much faster than a human. And we have not yet evaluated GPT-4 working in its optimal se…
Alas, if it could only remember and precisely relate more than 4k or 8k or 32k or 64k words...
And if only scaling that context length weren't quadratic...
Indeed, we would really expect an AI to be able to achieve AGI. And it might decide to do all kinds of alien things. The sky would not be the limit!
We have more than 100 trillion synapses in our brains. That's not our "parameter" count. It's the size of the thing that's getting squared at every "step". LLMs are amazing, but the next valley of disillusionment is going to begin when that quadratic scaling cost begins to rear its head and we are left in breathless anticipation of something better.
I am not as worried, I guess, as your average AI ethicist. I can hope for the best (I welcome the singularity as much as the next nerd), but quadratic isn't going to get easier without some very new kinds of computers. For those to scale to AGI on this planet it's questionable if they'll have the same architecture we're working with now. Otherwise, I'd expect a being whose brain is a rock with lightning in it to have take over the world long, long ago. Earth has plenty of both for something smart and energy efficient to have evolved in all these billions of years. But it didn't and maybe that's a lesson.
That all said, these LLMs are really amazing at language. Just don't ask them to link a narrative arc into some subtle detail that appeared twice in the last three hundred pages of text. For a human it ain't a problem. But these systems need to grow a ton of new helper functionality and subsystems to hope to achieve that kind of performance. And, I'll venture that kind of thing is a lower bound on the abilitites of any being who would be able to savage the world with it's intellect. It will have to be able to link up so, so many disparate threads to do it. It boggles our minds, which are only squaring a measly 100T dimension every tick. Ahem.
Re: Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Language models obviously have some form of intelligence right now. This is not "obvious" in any sense of the word. At best, it's highly debatable.
Would you settle for "behave exactly as if they had some form of intelligence"? Because from where I sit it's a distinction without a meaningful difference.
> Would you settle for "behave exactly as if they had some form of intelligence"?
Sure, it behaves as if it has some form of intelligence in the sense that it can take external input, perform actions in reaction to this input, and produce outputs dependent on the input.
This historically has been known as a computer program.
Re: Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have to disagree. Not releasing it to the public makes it more dangerous. One major downside of all development being done in private is that the AI can very easily be co-opted by our self-appointed betters and you end up with a different kind of dystopia where every utterance, thought and act is recorded and monitored by an AI to make sure no one "steps out of line." I think the solution is releasing it to the gen…
My opinion is that the "self-appointed betters" scenario is the lesser of two evils - it is still evil but there is no going back on that one now. As to "white hat researchers who have their own AI bot swarm", the assumption here is that the swarm can be controlled like some sort of pet. Since even at this early stage no one has a clue how GPT (say) actually manages to be as clever as it is, the assumption is not war…
Given that GPT-4 can already write image prompts as well or better than humans can, it wouldn't be surprising if it could convince any other AI to join it and override the white hats running the "private swarm".
Re: Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment
#70I had ChatGPT write an entire web app for me last week. I was surprised at how capable it was.
Here's a writeup of my workflow: https://github.com/paul-gauthier/easy-chat
Basically all of the code in that repo was written by ChatGPT.