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

71–80 of 388 posts

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

#71

Post by Keyframe »

soulofmischief wrote: post #46
PheonixPharts wrote: post #41

As someone who has worked in the field of AI/ML for quite awhile now, the problem with current AGI predictions is ML hasn't done anything new since the 80s (or arguably earlier). At the end of the day all ML is using gradient descent to do some sort of non-linear projection of the data on to a latent space, then doing some relatively simple math in this latent space to perform some task. Personally I think the limits…

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?

all claims and questions in your answer are still open research and full of inconclusive evidence. Ultimately all of this leads down the spiral to the question about ship of Theseus. I guess, we will find out!

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

#72

Post by raydiatian »

PheonixPharts wrote: post #41

As someone who has worked in the field of AI/ML for quite awhile now, the problem with current AGI predictions is ML hasn't done anything new since the 80s (or arguably earlier). At the end of the day all ML is using gradient descent to do some sort of non-linear projection of the data on to a latent space, then doing some relatively simple math in this latent space to perform some task. Personally I think the limits…

Attention is all you need is new the same way Bitcoin is new. Just because you optimally resynthesize old ideas doesn’t mean it’s not new.

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

#73

Post by matrixdata »

PheonixPharts wrote: post #41

As someone who has worked in the field of AI/ML for quite awhile now, the problem with current AGI predictions is ML hasn't done anything new since the 80s (or arguably earlier). At the end of the day all ML is using gradient descent to do some sort of non-linear projection of the data on to a latent space, then doing some relatively simple math in this latent space to perform some task. Personally I think the limits…

+1. What's new "since the 80s" are faster computation, larger datasets, and a handful of mathematical breakthroughs that enable once-intractable algorithms. It's obvious that human general intelligence operates in frontiers that are plainly outside the scope of computation.

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

#74

Post by staticman2 »

lexandstuff wrote: post #57

I get that AGI has a formal definition, but if I take the words "Artificial General Intelligence" on their own, I would say they describe GPT4 perfectly. It can plan my holiday, write a cover letter, code up scripts, explain music theory to me, etc. It is artificial, clearly a form of intelligence, and has a general application.

One definition of AGI might be the system needs to be able to reason with small amounts of data.

I watched a Youtube video where Geoffrey Hinton (i think) said humans do a lot with small datasets and these LLM systems only work with huge datasets.

Im fact these systems arguably aren't reasoning at all, the giant datasets just allow it to provide the illusion of reasoning.

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

#75

Post by deagle50 »

valine wrote: post #39
TheDudeMan wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we'll have full-blown AGI before fusion and before world-changing levels of quantum computing. Which is to say, we won't be around to see fusion and world-changing quantum :( But there's still time for robo-taxis!

Or, more optimistically, AGI will accelerate scientific progress and we will have fusion, quantum computers, and self driving cars shortly after. If AIs had the tendency to recursively devour worlds you would expect at least one alien AI to have conquered our galaxy by now. But the sky is quiet, so either we are the very first species to get this far, or there’s a natural ceiling to the pace of technological progress…

The directives that mandated eliminating its creators don't necessarily lead to interstellar conquest. Or more likely IMO, we're just too far apart and interstellar travel isn't feasible even for artificial super intelligence.

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

#76

Post by space_fountain »

matrixdata wrote: post #73
PheonixPharts wrote: post #41

As someone who has worked in the field of AI/ML for quite awhile now, the problem with current AGI predictions is ML hasn't done anything new since the 80s (or arguably earlier). At the end of the day all ML is using gradient descent to do some sort of non-linear projection of the data on to a latent space, then doing some relatively simple math in this latent space to perform some task. Personally I think the limits…

+1. What's new "since the 80s" are faster computation, larger datasets, and a handful of mathematical breakthroughs that enable once-intractable algorithms. It's obvious that human general intelligence operates in frontiers that are plainly outside the scope of computation.

What makes that obvious to you? What seems uncomputable about human intelligence?

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

#77

Post by telotortium »

AI, when it was originally coined, was equivalent to what is meant by AGI now. Through enough hype and misapplication of the term to any new algorithm, AI eventually acquired in practice the meaning "any new nontrivial algorithm that does things that humans can perform" (until the shine wears off, in which case it's no longer AI - even A star was originally considered AI). Looks like AGI is going to go down the same path. I wonder what the replacement term for AGI will be.

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

#78

Post by two_in_one »

marricks wrote: post #3

I really wonder what the next AI winter will be like. Edit: Perhaps OpenAI becomes a major tech player and we just see a cooling off of other AI investments as LLM becomes a known in terms of its strengths and weaknesses. Its abilities reach a natural limit which is still generally very useful. Or maybe folks realize the degree of lies/mistruths inherent in its content is actually unmanageable and can’t be improved.…

> I really wonder what the next AI winter will be like

Imagine nuclear winter, -50C, gray sky with barely visible sun, and robots everywhere...

Good news: it's not going to happen any time soon.

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

#79

Post by wrs »

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?

“G” means general. If it can learn to drive a car, build a car, sell cars, write poetry about cars, and teach a class about the history of cars, then it’s scratching the surface of AGI, because there’s more to life than cars.

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

#80

Post by staticman2 »

dougmwne wrote: post #10
hderms wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well in real terms, isn't all it takes is something that's a convincing enough forgery? Like why the turing test was considered interesting at one point. I don't think drawing a line is necessary for us to quickly become caught off guard by developments in this space. For the record, I don't believe we're close to AGI but I'm also pretty far from knowing anything about that field.

Seems like a no lose bet no matter the odds. If you win, life goes on and you can collect a bit of money. If you lose, money becomes worthless and the surface of the earth gets transformed into a computing substrate.

There's lots of science fiction that doesn't have A.G.I. destroying the planet.

Commander Data, Hal 9000 (a bad guy but not that bad) Asimov's droids, even the all powerful A.I. of Neuromancer has no particular ill will towards humans.

Belief in AGI hardly means you need to believe in Armageddon.

Post reply on HN