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

Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 388 posts

Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

#61

Post by asdfman123 »

mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote: post #55
wg0 wrote: post #13

The other few things possible in next few years for past few years are: 1. Fusion 2. Self driving cars. 3. Ubiquitous, generally available and stable 8192 bit quantum computers. 4. High energy density grid scale batteries. Just few more "this maybe the... what could revolutionize..." articles away. What we forget is that it is in these people's business interest (executives making such statements) to state the exagge…

Not sure when you last upgraded your pc. Personally I'm running the latest roomtemp superconducting, 4Giqb quantum memristor computer. It even remotely drives my fusion-powered car over the quantum internet!

Don’t forget mentioning your new AI girlfriend

Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

#64

Post by gwoolhurme »

useruser125524 wrote: post #56
soulofmischief wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ultimately you are just a system who maintains homeostasis by modeling your environment and reprojecting it to find patterns which can be used to make actions with predictable outcomes. Is this intelligence? Is there only one correct way to achieve this goal? What do you believe intelligence to be?

Ultimately we're just a collection of atoms obeying the laws of physics, but reducing all the complexity that entails doesn't really accomplish anything

This is my frustration put really well. When people talk about how humans are also just a form of LLM (not that the above comment did exactly that). That might even be true, but simplifying things to that degree doesn't help actually discuss what is going on. The original comment is as far as I know correct... while I don't have a PhD some of my undergraduate work was in control theory and ML, and it works really well. The underlying methods we used were from NASA in the late 70s.. surely there is something more in the field no?

Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

#65

Post by grumple »

sowbug wrote: post #50
ckemere wrote: post #23

Several comments have touched on this, but wouldn't you define an AGI as something that could learn to drive a car? I think every (reasonable ( person understands self driving is >10 years away. So shouldn't AGI be?

Self-driving cars are colloquially held to a much higher standard than human drivers are. Nothing currently exists that meets that standard. But humans meet the GI standard of AGI. And strong evidence shows that humans exist. Thus, the standard for AGI is lower than the standard for self-driving cars. Existence of an AGI does not imply existence of self-driving cars. To put it another way: take the worst human driver…

Aren't the best self driving cars causing traffic jams in SF because they can't handle everyday tasks? And can any self driving car handle suboptimal environments like snow? Or just unmarked roads? Or... left turns in traffic?

Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

#66

Post by gwoolhurme »

resource0x wrote: post #31
wg0 wrote: post #13

The other few things possible in next few years for past few years are: 1. Fusion 2. Self driving cars. 3. Ubiquitous, generally available and stable 8192 bit quantum computers. 4. High energy density grid scale batteries. Just few more "this maybe the... what could revolutionize..." articles away. What we forget is that it is in these people's business interest (executives making such statements) to state the exagge…

Fusion by 1990 with a bit of extra investment promised in 1972 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.175.4027.1194.b I remember tons of articles from that time arguing the same. Then the attention shifted to "fifth-generation computers".

That is actually a really interesting find. Some of the verbiage is parallel to the hype we have around AGI right now too "fusion by 1990 instead of 2000..." does that not sound exactly like AGI in X year up from Y year that we read now?

Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

#67

Post by agentultra »

It seems to me that software developers are all too eager to attribute properties such as “intelligence,” to LLM’s which lead to strange, reductive conclusions that this is all humans are: token matching algorithms.

There is much to intelligence that those who’ve been studying it in areas such as biology and ecology still do not understand. The role of emotions and how they work have a strong influence on our cognitive abilities and consciousness as a whole. This is rarely ever considered a part of intelligence in the AI space.

And I think that’s rather the interesting part of all of this: we skip the artificial part and leap straight into deus ex machina. It is artificial and limited to what we choose to implement.

Even unsupervised learning isn’t technically that marvellous under the hood. In the sense that it is unknowable and seemingly magical.

I don’t agree that we’re a few years away from Data (a character from Star Trek : The Next Generation and an artificial life form) and we have no idea if we’d ever be able to implement Lore (a related character from the same show that has the benefits of being able to simulate emotions).

Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

#68

Post by staticman2 »

ckemere wrote: post #23

Several comments have touched on this, but wouldn't you define an AGI as something that could learn to drive a car? I think every (reasonable ( person understands self driving is >10 years away. So shouldn't AGI be?

If the AGI needs to live in a giant data center it probably can't reliably drive a car due to latency issues.

Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

#69

Post by willbudd »

nextos wrote: post #58
soulofmischief wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ultimately you are just a system who maintains homeostasis by modeling your environment and reprojecting it to find patterns which can be used to make actions with predictable outcomes. Is this intelligence? Is there only one correct way to achieve this goal? What do you believe intelligence to be?

There's a good summary in the Introduction to Kevin Murphy's second tome [1]. He quotes Josh Tenenbaum, who said: "Intelligence is not just about pattern recognition and function approximation. It’s about modeling the world" . I agree, and I think Goodman & Tenennaum [2] is a great place to see other things that may pop up in the road to AGI. LLMs are great, but they do too much at once. I think moving towards AGI re…

Modelling the world is function approximation: the world is the function and the model is the approximation.

Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

#70

Post by WillPostForFood »

wg0 wrote: post #48
testfoobar wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll add another one: all trucks and cars will be electric in 10 years.

Don't see that happening. Electric cars are either a rich boy's toy or environmentalists or enthusiasts are into it. Average Joe with concerns of practicality and longevity is sticking to ICEs for foreseeable future.

OTOH, Average Joe is mandating 50% electric cars by 2030 and 66% by 2032! It is going to be the battle of the Average Joes.
Post reply on HN