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

Evolving OpenAI's Structure

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

701–710 of 746 posts

Re: Evolving OpenAI's Structure

#701

Post by _heimdall »

root_axis wrote: post #581
_heimdall wrote: post #568

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People physically unable to use the tool can't learn to use it. This isn't necessarily my view, but one could make a pretty easy argument that the LLMs we have today can't drive a car only because they aren't physically able to control the car.

> but one could make a pretty easy argument that the LLMs we have today can't drive a car only because they aren't physically able to control the car. Of course they can. We already have computer controlled car systems, the reason LLMs aren't used to drive them is because AI systems that specialize in text are a poor choice for driving - specialized driving models will always outperform them for a variety of technica…

We have compute controlled automobiles, not LLM controlled automobiles.

That was my whole point. Maybe in theory an LLM could learn to drive a car, but they can't today because they don't physically have access to cars they could try to drive just like a person who can't learn to use a tool because they're physically limited from using it.

Re: Evolving OpenAI's Structure

#702

Post by root_axis »

_heimdall wrote: post #701
root_axis wrote: post #581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but one could make a pretty easy argument that the LLMs we have today can't drive a car only because they aren't physically able to control the car. Of course they can. We already have computer controlled car systems, the reason LLMs aren't used to drive them is because AI systems that specialize in text are a poor choice for driving - specialized driving models will always outperform them for a variety of technica…

We have compute controlled automobiles, not LLM controlled automobiles. That was my whole point. Maybe in theory an LLM could learn to drive a car, but they can't today because they don't physically have access to cars they could try to drive just like a person who can't learn to use a tool because they're physically limited from using it.

It doesn't make sense to connect a LLM to a car, that could never work because they are trained offline using curated data sets.

Re: Evolving OpenAI's Structure

#703

Post by [deleted] »

achierius wrote: post #572
cik wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So you don't mind if your economic value drops to zero, with all human labour replaced by machines? This was the fear when the cotton gin was invented. It was the ear when cars were created. The same complaint happened with the introduction of electronic, automated, telephone switchboards. Jobs change. Societies change. Unemployment worldwide, is near the lowest it has ever been. Work will change. Society will even…

Where did all the work-horses go? Why is there barely a fraction of the population there once was? Why did they not adapt and find niches where they had a competitive advantage over cars and machines?

[deleted]

Re: Evolving OpenAI's Structure

#704

Post by NoOn3 »

babyshake wrote: post #462
lanthissa wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AGI can't really be a winner take all market. The 'reward' for general intelligence is infinite as a monopoly and it accelerates productivity. Not only is there infinite incentive to compete, but theres decreasing costs to. The only world in which AGI is winner take all is a world in which it is extremely controlled to the point at which the public cant query it.

AGI can be winner take all. But winner take all AGI is not aligned with the larger interests of humanity.

Modern corporations did't seem to care about humanity...

Re: Evolving OpenAI's Structure

#705

Post by nearbuy »

geysersam wrote: post #577
thurn wrote: post #560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which of these statements do you disagree with? - Superintelligence poses an existential threat to humanity - Predicting the future is famously difficult - Given that uncertainty, we can't rule out the chance of our current AI approach leading to superintelligence - Even a 1-in-1000 existential threat would be extremely serious. If an asteroid had a 1-in-1000 chance of hitting Earth and obliterating humanity we shoul…

Isn't the question you're posing basically Pascals wager? I think the chance they're going to create a "superintelligence" is extremely small. That said I'm sure we're going to have a lot of useful intelligence. But nothing general or self-conscious or powerful enough to be threatening for many decades or even ever. > Predicting the future is famously difficult That's very true, but that fact unfortunately can never…

> I think the chance they're going to create a "superintelligence" is extremely small.

I'd say the chance that we never create a superintelligence is extremely small. You either have to believe that for some reason the human brain achieved the maximum intelligence possible, or that progress on AI will just stop for some reason.

Most forecasters on prediction markets are predicting AGI within a decade.

Re: Evolving OpenAI's Structure

#706

Post by sneak »

tastyface wrote: post #547
sneak wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is more a symptom of the level of commonplace corruption in the American regulatory environment than any indication of the political views of the person directing such donations. Tim Apple did it too, and we don’t assume he’s an authoritarian now too, do we? I imagine they would probably have done similarly regardless of who won the election. It sure seems like an endorsement, but I think it’s simply mod…

I do feel that way about every CEO in those cheery inauguration day photos ( https://apnews.com/article/trump-inauguration-tech-billionai... ). Zuckerberg, Bezos, Pichai, Cook, Altman, Musk, Thiel: enablers of fascism, every one. However, it should be noted that Cook donated from his own name and not Apple. Guess he didn't want his shittiness to rub off on his company. As for the shareholders, Cook was more than happ…

As far as “enablers” of fascism - would we have the same amount of fascism if they didn’t participate? I posit that the answer is yes.

Furthermore, you are dead wrong on the last point. The “dispute” between the FBI and Apple is a fiction designed to restore public trust in Apple’s privacy stance following the Snowden revelations about FAA702 (aka PRISM) that shows that companies allow the USG warrantless access to their data in realtime via special APIs or portals.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-fbi-icloud-exclusiv...

The tech executives came to DC to meet with Obama in the wake of the whole Snowden thing to discuss it, though it was widely reported as being a consult on fixing healthcare.gov (lol) a few outlets reported it correctly. There are photos of the meeting kicking around.

I imagine the Apple-vs-the-FBI narrative (which is widely regarded as true and has resulted in mainstream false belief, such as yours demonstrated here) was borne directly out of these meetings.

Apple intentionally maintains access to the majority of their users’ data by the USG and the CCP (in their respective zones). It is required for them to continue operating in their current fashion. Every iMessage and (basically) every file in iCloud (photos included) is readable by Apple and the government. Apple has the technical capability to prevent this by migrating their userbase to e2ee systems, and they do not.

I firmly believe that this is by design, and that they would be very severely punished, legally or extralegally, if they changed the status quo.

Re: Evolving OpenAI's Structure

#707

Post by nearbuy »

ixtli wrote: post #681
herculity275 wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The goalposts seem to have shifted to a point where the "AGI" label will only be retroactively applied to an AI that was able to develop ASI

how many times must we repeat that AGI is whatever will sell the project. it means nothing. even philosophers don't have a good definition of "intelligence"

AGI just refers roughly to the intelligence it would take to replace most if not all white collar workers. There is no precise definition, but it's not meaningless.

Re: Evolving OpenAI's Structure

#709

Post by dbacar »

dns_snek wrote: post #642
dbacar wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is already here, kinda. I mean look at how it passes the bar exam, solves math olympiad level questions, generates video, art, music. What else are you looking for? It already has penetrated into job market causing significant disruption in programming. We are not seeing flying cars but we are witnessing things even not talked about around campfire. Seriously even 4 years ago, would you think all these would happe…

> What else are you looking for? To begin with, systems that don't tell people to use elmer's glue to keep the cheese from sliding off the pizza, displaying a fundamental lack of understanding of.. everything. At minimum it needs to be able to reliably solve hard, unique, but well-defined problems like a group of the most cohesive intelligent people could. It's certainly not AGI until it can do a better job than the…

Majority of people on earth don't solve hard, unique, but well-defined problems, do we? I dont expect AGI to to solve one of Hilbert's list of problems (yet). Your definition of AGI is a bit too imposing. Saying that I believe you would get answers from an LLM better than most of the answers you would get from an average human. IMHO the trend is obvious and we will see if it stalls or keeps the pace.

Re: Evolving OpenAI's Structure

#710

Post by dbacar »

bdangubic wrote: post #377
dbacar wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is already here, kinda. I mean look at how it passes the bar exam, solves math olympiad level questions, generates video, art, music. What else are you looking for? It already has penetrated into job market causing significant disruption in programming. We are not seeing flying cars but we are witnessing things even not talked about around campfire. Seriously even 4 years ago, would you think all these would happe…

AGI is here?????! Damn, me, and every other human, must have missed that news… /s

Such things happen.
Post reply on HN