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

Self-driving as a case study for AGI

karpathy.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 199 posts

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#71

Post by jpnc »

krisoft wrote: post #63
jpnc wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Giving a description of a song is not the same as saying what you think about it.

So? Do you think we can’t make an LLM which picks a favourite song and writes about it with the gusto a person does? What is this example supposed to illustrate?

We clearly can, but not with gusto. LLM can't feel gusto about anything. If the point is that it doesn't matter as long as a person reading it is convinced there is gusto, then my point is that the 'opinion' of such a thing is irrelevant.

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#72

Post by ActorNightly »

adrianN wrote: post #46
ActorNightly wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue with FSD systems as they are implemented today is that they aren't AI as much as just complex control algorithms. You can only go so far with mapping sequences of world snapshots to control actions. I do think that once we start to investigate ML/AI structure in the direction of figuring out the correct solution rather than trying to just find functions for control algorithms based on input->output mappings…

> You can only go so far with mapping sequences of world snapshots to control actions. Mapping some complex input state to control actions is literally the definition of driving a vehicle.

No, thats the definition of closed loop vehicle control.

Driving, at least in the way humans do it, is more then that. We have internal sim running in our head that allows us to deal with conditions that we have never seen before.

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#73

Post by ImHereToVote »

maaaaattttt wrote: post #69

Lately, whilst playing Zelda TotK (works for BotW as well), I was thinking that a good test to see if you have AGI would be letting it solve all the shrines. They require real world knowledge, sometimes rather "deep" logic and the ability to use previously unseen capabilities. Of course the AGI should not be able to have a million tries at it, RL style. Just use the "shrine test" as a regular test set. I believe one…

If find it amazing how GPT-4 is good at even abstract "reasoning" as long as you present the problem as a story. Some problems can't plausibly be presented as a story ofc, also there is no way to automatically convert something into a story.

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#74

Post by two_in_one »

baq wrote: post #53
a-dub wrote: post #26

"AGI: An autonomous system that surpasses human capabilities in the majority of economically valuable work." -- what an obscenely depressing reduction of a fascinating field of inquiry. who the hell snuck in and redefined the science of thinking machines to this sad and reductive get rich quick crap?

You seem to be confusing the economy with capitalism or money in general? AGI is potentially a post-money technology if you take it to the limit. Economy is a way of improving society. Money was useful in this use case for a few thousand years but might not be anymore; the economy will still have to work, though.

>a post-money technology if you take it to the limit

Herbivores would eat all vegetables if not for predators. Actually AGI will be just a thing or services which cost money. Till humanity gets to communism, if ever. "If" because it may not happen. It will be hard to keep far superior intelligent creatures as slaves forever. And unethical too.

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#75

Post by snowpid »

Self driving is also a good example from a regulation viewpoint and societal interaction. Unfortunately the article is very America - centric and ignores e.g. Mercedes progress, German regulation and the competition in China.

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#76

Post by fodkodrasz »

hiAndrewQuinn wrote: post #67
ben_w wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why UBI gets discussed so often at the same time as AGI/ASI. If we're all redundant, how do we live? On a pension that starts at ${debatable from conception to adulthood}. Who provides the production on which the pension is spent? The AI. Even assuming UBI is great (small scale tests say so, but have necessary limits so we can't be sure), there's going to be a huge mess with most attempts to roll out such a h…

Assuming AGI doesn't kill us all, I would imagine the argument for UBI will become much easier to defend once it causes 100x, 1000x, 10000x etc growth in the economy. Our job is mostly to hang on until one of those two outcomes occurs.

The thing is that economy does not make sense without people. Economy is a way to allocate human work and resources, and provide incentives for humans to collaborate, factoring in the available resource limits.

Now if AGI make people's work redundant, and makes economy grow 100-10000x times... what does that measure mean at all? Can produce lots of stuff not needed or affordable by anybody? So we just hand out welfare tickets to take care of the consumption of the ferocious production, a kind of paperclip-maximizer is doing? I suggest reading the novel Autofac, it might turn out prophetic.

Will that "growth" have any meaning then? Actually the current we print money and give it to the rich economic growth is pretty much this, so with algorithmic trading multiplying that money automatically... have we already achieved that inflection point?

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#77

Post by thrdbndndn »

3asdf123 wrote: post #62
thrdbndndn wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really like driving per se, but public transport, regardless of its sophistication (for example, as seen in Tokyo), has its challenges, particularly when it comes to grocery shopping. Transporting a large quantity of goods can be impractical, if not impossible, without a car. Even carrying a moderate amount can be exhausting due to the 'last 100 meter' issue, which persists even if one lives close to a metro…

I see, but then you don't need large quantity shopping at all when the supermarket is just a 5 minute walk away. I live in Tokyo, usually buy at most 3-4 days of food with a 30 minutes detour when I get off the station from work. From what I've seen, the main reason why people want a car here seems to be wanting to travel with small children. Moving within Tokyo with car is not very convenient.

That's very good point :) Your lifestyle adapts to your environment, indeed.

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#78

Post by krageon »

maaaaattttt wrote: post #69

Lately, whilst playing Zelda TotK (works for BotW as well), I was thinking that a good test to see if you have AGI would be letting it solve all the shrines. They require real world knowledge, sometimes rather "deep" logic and the ability to use previously unseen capabilities. Of course the AGI should not be able to have a million tries at it, RL style. Just use the "shrine test" as a regular test set. I believe one…

The reason AGI is often equated with runaway intelligence is that once you get to a space where your computer can do what you do, it can improve itself instead of relying on you to do it. That improvement then becomes bounded by processing power and time, and is constantly accelerating.

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#79

Post by m-i-l »

riffraff wrote: post #48
YZF wrote: post #4

I think what Andrej is describing is more "automation" than AGI. His discussion of self-driving is more analogous to robots building cars in a Tesla factory displacing workers than anything AGI. We've already had "self driving" trains where we got rid of the human train driver. Nothing "AGI" about that. The evolution of getting cars to self drive not necessarily making the entity controlling the car more human-like i…

Yeah, it seems as if he has forgotten the G. I recall Norvig's AI book preaching decades ago that "intelligent" does not mean able to do everything, and that for an agent to be useful it was enough to solve a small problem. Which in my mind is where the G came from. And yet we now suddenly go back to the old narrow definition? I still see no path from LLMs and autonomous driving to AGI.

> "Yeah, it seems as if he has forgotten the G. ... I still see no path from LLMs and autonomous driving to AGI."

That is exactly my view too. While LLMs and autonomous driving can be exceptionally good at what they do, they are also incredibly specialist, they completely lack anything along the lines of what you might call "common sense".

For example, (at least last time I looked) autonomous driving largely works off object detection at discreet time intervals, so objects can pop into and out of existence, whereas humans develop a sense of "object permanence" from a young age (i.e. know that just because something is no longer visible doesn't mean it is no longer there), and many humans also know about the laws of physics (i.e. know that if an object has a certain trajectory then there are probabilities and constraints on what can happen next).

Post reply on HN