611–620 of 1001 posts
If we are so close this is something that’s required then it’s already too late and very likely we are all under the influence of SuperAI and don’t know it. So much of the advanced technology we have today was around for so long before it was general knowledge it’s hard to believe this wouldn’t be the case with SuperAI.
Or it’s not close at all and so back to my original point of…this is pointless.
I do hope I’m entirely wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Likewise, i'm baffled by intelligent people [in such denial] still making the reductionist argument about token prediction being a banal ability. It's not. It's not very different than how our intelligence manifest.
> It's not very different than how our intelligence manifest. [citation needed]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You can make a safe AI today, but what happens when the next person is managing things? The point of safe superintelligence , and presumably the goal of SSI Inc., is that there won't be a next (biological) person managing things afterwards. At least none who could do anything to build a competing unsafe SAI. We're not talking about the banal definition of "safety" here. If the first superintelligence has any reason…
I wonder how many people panicking about these things have ever visited a data centre. They have big red buttons at the end of every pod. Shuts everything down. They have bigger red buttons at the end of every power unit. Shuts everything down. And down at the city, there’s a big red button at the biggest power unit. Shuts everything down. Having arms and legs is going to be a significant benefit for some time yet. I…
Not to be too pessimistic here, but why are we talking about things like this? I get that it’s a fun thing to think about, what we will do when a great artificial superintelligence is achieved and how we deal with it, feels like we’re living in a science fiction book. But, all we’ve achieved at this point is making a glorified token predicting machine trained on existing data (made by humans), not really being able t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You can make a safe AI today, but what happens when the next person is managing things? The point of safe superintelligence , and presumably the goal of SSI Inc., is that there won't be a next (biological) person managing things afterwards. At least none who could do anything to build a competing unsafe SAI. We're not talking about the banal definition of "safety" here. If the first superintelligence has any reason…
I wonder how many people panicking about these things have ever visited a data centre. They have big red buttons at the end of every pod. Shuts everything down. They have bigger red buttons at the end of every power unit. Shuts everything down. And down at the city, there’s a big red button at the biggest power unit. Shuts everything down. Having arms and legs is going to be a significant benefit for some time yet. I…
What a waste of an intelligence. Pursuing artificial goal to solve a non existent problem to profit off meaningless hype around it. World would have been better off if he made a decent alternative to k8s or invested his skills into curing cancer or at least protecting world from totalitarian governments and dangerous ideologies (if he wants to belong to vague generic cause). You know, real problems, like the ones peo…
but would that stave off an impending recession?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a cute generalization but you do yourself a great disservice. It's somewhat difficult to argue given the medium we have here and it may be impossible to disprove but consider that in first 30 minutes of your post being highly visible on this thread no one had yet replied. Some may have acted in other ways.. had opinions.. voted it up/down. Some may have debated replying in jest or with a some related biblical ve…
I’m not the OP, and I genuinely don’t like how we’re slowly entering the “no text in internet is real” realm, but I’ll take a stab at your question. If you made an LLM to pretend to have a specific personality (e.g. assume you are a religious person and you’re going to make a comment in this thread) rather than “generic catch-all LLM”, they can pretty much do that. Part of Reddit is just automated PR LLMs fighting ea…
My point was we are not just glorified token predicting machines. There is a lot going on behind what we write and whether we write it or not. Does the method matter vs just the output? I think/hope it does on some level.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do people always think that a superintelligent being will always be destructive/evil to US? I rather have the opposite view where if you are really intelligent, you don’t see things as a zero sum game
I think the common line of thinking here is that it won't be actively antagonist to , rather it will have goals that are orthogonal to ours. Since it is superintelligent, and we are not, it will achieve its goals and we will not be able to achieve ours. This is a big deal because a lot of our goals maintain the overall homeostasis of our species, which is delicate! If this doesn't make sense, here is an ungrounded, n…
The interface between a superintelligent AI and the physical world is a) optional, and b) tenuous. If people agree that creating weird concrete structures is not beneficial, the AI will be starved of the resources necessary to do so, even if it cannot be diverted.
The challenge comes when these weird concrete structures are useful to a narrow group of people who have disproportionate influence over the resources available to AI.
It's not the AI we need to worry about. As always, it's the humans.
Not to be too pessimistic here, but why are we talking about things like this? I get that it’s a fun thing to think about, what we will do when a great artificial superintelligence is achieved and how we deal with it, feels like we’re living in a science fiction book. But, all we’ve achieved at this point is making a glorified token predicting machine trained on existing data (made by humans), not really being able t…
AlphaGo took us from mediocre engines to outclassing the best human players in the world within a few short years. Ilya contributed to AlphaGo. What makes you so confident this can't happen with token prediction?
Why do we need computers that are better than humans at the game of token prediction?
Not to be too pessimistic here, but why are we talking about things like this? I get that it’s a fun thing to think about, what we will do when a great artificial superintelligence is achieved and how we deal with it, feels like we’re living in a science fiction book. But, all we’ve achieved at this point is making a glorified token predicting machine trained on existing data (made by humans), not really being able t…
Remove token, and that's what we humans do.
Like, you need to realize that neural networks came to be because someone had the idea to mimic our brains' functionality, and see where that lead to.
Many skeptics at the beginning like you discredited the inventor, but he was proved wrong. LLMs shown how much more than your limited description they can achieve.
We mimicked birds with airplanes, and we can outdo them. It's actually in my view very short sighted to say we can't just mimic brains and outdo them. We're there. ChatGPT is the initial little planes that flew close to the ground and barely stayed up