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

Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

eetimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 151 posts

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#61

Post by vasco »

moffkalast wrote: post #40
omneity wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keeping in mind, this holds true in a runaway fashion if the only bottleneck to more intelligence is further intelligence. I suspect physical limitations similar to how many runaway processes in the universe are more logistical than exponential in nature.

Logistics tend to be improvable with more inteligence though, no? There is precedence for superhuman inteligence if you look at the best historical polymaths, and that's just what one can do with 20 W of energy. We're probably nowhere close to the universal inteligence cap in terms of physical limitations, if there even is such a thing.

Sure but then you need to manually do the back and forward whenever you hit a new bottleneck. At some point the intelligence might need to figure out better power sources and deliver to feed bigger clusters of compute. Those clusters need to physically be deployed somewhere in the real world also, etc.

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#63

Post by jliptzin »

m3kw9 wrote: post #41
falcor84 wrote: post #22

"""Let an ultraintelligent machine be defined as a machine that can far surpass all the intellectual activities of any man however clever. Since the design of machines is one of these intellectual activities, an ultraintelligent machine could design even better machines; there would then unquestionably be an 'intelligence explosion,' and the intelligence of man would be left far behind... Thus the first ultraintellig…

How does it magically run away? What’s the process, we all talk about it “running away” leaving us “behind”, the exact practical process of that happening has not been laid out other than people hand wavingly copying apocalyptic movie scripts. Most ai experts just say it could end us, but suspiciously never gives a detailed plausible process and people suspicious just say oh yeah, it could, and there is a bubble over…

Yea, that’s what I want to know as well. How does a computer that can’t physically move destroy the human race? If it’s misbehaving, turn it off?

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#64

Post by [deleted] »

omneity wrote: post #39
falcor84 wrote: post #22

"""Let an ultraintelligent machine be defined as a machine that can far surpass all the intellectual activities of any man however clever. Since the design of machines is one of these intellectual activities, an ultraintelligent machine could design even better machines; there would then unquestionably be an 'intelligence explosion,' and the intelligence of man would be left far behind... Thus the first ultraintellig…

Keeping in mind, this holds true in a runaway fashion if the only bottleneck to more intelligence is further intelligence. I suspect physical limitations similar to how many runaway processes in the universe are more logistical than exponential in nature.

[deleted]

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#65

Post by pixl97 »

jliptzin wrote: post #63
m3kw9 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does it magically run away? What’s the process, we all talk about it “running away” leaving us “behind”, the exact practical process of that happening has not been laid out other than people hand wavingly copying apocalyptic movie scripts. Most ai experts just say it could end us, but suspiciously never gives a detailed plausible process and people suspicious just say oh yeah, it could, and there is a bubble over…

Yea, that’s what I want to know as well. How does a computer that can’t physically move destroy the human race? If it’s misbehaving, turn it off?

Come on now, you don't lack that much imagination do you?

Already we're programming these things into robots that are gaining dexterity and ability to move in the world. Hooking them up to mills and machines that produce things. Integrating them into weapons of war, etc.

Next, the current LLMs are just software applications that can run on any compatible machine. Note that any just does not include your, but every compatible machine.

The last failure of imagination when considering risk is form factor. You have 2 pounds of mush between your ears that probably 80% of is dedicated to keeping itself alive and this runs on 20 or so watts. What is the minimum size and power form factor capable of emulating something on the scale of human intelligence? In your mind this seems to be something the size of an ENIAC room. For me this is something the size and power factor of a cellphone in some future date. Could you imagine turning off all cellphones? Would you even know where they are?

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#66

Post by pixl97 »

accrual wrote: post #53
epups wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is a plausible scenario: - Single purpose AIs start to be deployed to coordinate chip design and manufacturing, perhaps pharmaceuticals and other bio products - LLM's become more powerful and are seamlessly integrated to the Internet as independent agents - A very large LLM develops a thread for self preservation, which then triggers several covert actions (monitoring communications, obtaining high-level credent…

I think the first three items are pretty reasonable, but the fourth seems to require some malicious intent. Why would an AI want to destroy its creators? Surely it if was intelligent enough do so, it would also be intelligent enough to recognize the benefits of a symbiotic relationship with humans. I could see it becoming greedy for information though, and using unscrupulous means of obtaining more.

This is a mistake in thinking.

If an when we get AGI, the biggest threat to AGI is other AGI. I mean, I'm in computer security, the first thing I'm doing is making an AI system that is attacking weaker computer systems by finding weaknesses in them. Now imagine that kind of system at nation state level resources. Not only is it attacking systems, it's having to protect itself from attack.

This is where the entire AI alignment issue comes in. The AI doesn't have to want. The paperclip optimizer never wanted to destroy humanity, instrumental convergence demands it!

I recommend Robert Miles videos on this topic. There aren't that many and they cover the topics well.

https://www.youtube.com/@RobertMilesAI/videos

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#67

Post by senseiV »

api wrote: post #52
omneity wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keeping in mind, this holds true in a runaway fashion if the only bottleneck to more intelligence is further intelligence. I suspect physical limitations similar to how many runaway processes in the universe are more logistical than exponential in nature.

The ultimate bottleneck is information a.k.a. training data. Nothing can learn with nothing to learn.

Nope Actually, networks like alpha zero learned with nothing. If only we could get that to training data

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#68

Post by api »

senseiV wrote: post #67
api wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ultimate bottleneck is information a.k.a. training data. Nothing can learn with nothing to learn.

Nope Actually, networks like alpha zero learned with nothing. If only we could get that to training data

They didn't learn with nothing. They learned with a game of Go to play. If they'd never "seen" the game of Go there's no way they could have learned to play it.

Data can be either static in the form of examples or dynamic in the form of an interactive game or world. Humans primarily learn through dynamic interaction with the world in our early years, then switch to learning more from static information as we enter schools and the work place.

One open question is how far you can go in terms of evolving intelligence with games and self-play or adversarial play. There's a whole subject area around this in evolutionary game theory.

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#69

Post by DesiLurker »

ethanbond wrote: post #35
falcor84 wrote: post #22

"""Let an ultraintelligent machine be defined as a machine that can far surpass all the intellectual activities of any man however clever. Since the design of machines is one of these intellectual activities, an ultraintelligent machine could design even better machines; there would then unquestionably be an 'intelligence explosion,' and the intelligence of man would be left far behind... Thus the first ultraintellig…

Don’t worry, it’ll be good because it’s trained on human stories, in which usually the good guy wins.

I know its /s but we also say that the victor writes the history books. and its kinda hard not to portray yourself as the good guy when the other guy is not around to defend himself. AGI will learn that too. I mean one look at earth and its not like we have been model citizens exactly.

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#70

Post by make3 »

falcor84 wrote: post #22

"""Let an ultraintelligent machine be defined as a machine that can far surpass all the intellectual activities of any man however clever. Since the design of machines is one of these intellectual activities, an ultraintelligent machine could design even better machines; there would then unquestionably be an 'intelligence explosion,' and the intelligence of man would be left far behind... Thus the first ultraintellig…

I hate the term science fiction, because it encompasses pretty serious science based studies of possible futures (like the book Hail Mary or Aldous Huxley's Brave New World) with complete star-wars-like nonsense, which make the average person think of sci fi as teenager nonsense.

Similarly, here, scifi oversimplifies the situation quite a bit, anthropomorphizing a machine's intelligence, assuming that an intelligent machine would be intelligent in the same way a human would be, in an equally spread out way as a human would, and would have goals & rebel in a similar way a human would

Post reply on HN