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

91–100 of 199 posts

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#91

Post by sgt101 »

1oooqooq wrote: post #83
wodenokoto wrote: post #50

> but automate it we did (ahead of many other sectors of the economy), and society has noticed and is responding to it I was quite surprised by this sentence, as I thought we didn't have self driving cars. Have I been sleeping under a rock?

We have remotely driven cars, that they market as self-driving. Even the crowd here fall for it. Downvote and then go read their term of service and look for "safety driver" and "remote" and "fleet response specialists". Then go cry about your waymo invesment.

I think you may be underselling :)

I agree, they have remote drivers waiting to take over, but I think that the current SOA is delivering a very high % of autonomy. Is this viable? Dunno... Will it creep up? Dunno...

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#92

Post by ImHereToVote »

1oooqooq wrote: post #81
ImHereToVote wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

So you are doing all the work by "coding" in a weird language that actually takes more brain power than regular high level (as in direct business logic, not C or python) programming languages?

Huh. How did you come to ask that question? I never mentioned how I code.

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#93

Post by latexr »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #66
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…

It's a meaningless distinction. You basically get sucked into a "what has AI ever done for us?" style debate analogous to Monty Python's Life of Brian. It's impossible to resolve. But the irony of course is the huge and growing list of things it is actually doing quite nicely. We'll have decently smart AIs before we nail down what that G actually means, should mean, absolutely cannot mean, etc. Which is usually what…

> You basically get sucked into a "what has AI ever done for us?" style debate analogous to Monty Python's Life of Brian.

Except today the bit (which wasn’t really a debate in the sketch because everyone agreed) would start with real current negatives such as accelerating the spread of misinformation and getting artists fired. In your analogy, it would be as if they were asking “what have the Romans ever done for us” during the war. Doesn’t really work.

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#94

Post by sgt101 »

So this makes me wonder if I were running society what questions should I ask...

- what Automation initiatives never hit "take off"? I mean, like for Nuclear Fusion, human interplanetary exploration, and Quantum Computing there's some chance that the technology simply remains beyond us "forever", I guess that "forever" means more than the lifetime of the people who start the journey... or maybe actually just beyond humans full stop. We should admit there is a non-zero chance that FSD is one of these failing quests, even if a rational observer would have to say that that chance does seem to be shrinking and close enough to 0 to instill some confidence. Perhaps domestic robotics, auto-doctors, robot-manufacturing, programming, drug development will playout to automation - but maybe not.

- how do we consider the utilisation of the resources to do this? FSD has been very expensive so far, it's consumed lots of investment capital and lots of human creativity. Was that investment rational given where we stand? If society had held off and invested minimally from 2000->2024 how much would that have delayed the technology in reality? Or is it the other way round? Has the FSD investment facilitated the development of other technologies and created a 1->1 acceleration (for every year of 2000->2024 it's brought FSD a year closer than it would have been, so a cold start this year would mean FSD by 2050 or similar, whereas if we keep going then we can expect FSD by e.g. 2026)

- how do we value these outcomes? Are these unalloyed goods, or are some worse than the status-quo? It could be argued that the development of some technologies left the world worse off than before - smoking, social media, personal automobiles (I know this is politically charged but I am just using examples others have raised before). Can we choose rationally, especially if a large scale intervention and development process is required to realise these outcomes?

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#95

Post by mlazos »

motoxpro wrote: post #70
dave4420 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have self driving cars in an extremely limited number of cities (just one or two) and you can’t buy them, you can only use them like an Uber. He’s overselling how mature the technology is.

How is he over selling it when he says explicitly that waymo exists in two cities? It's solved in that it works and they have to scale horizonatally.

lol why do you think they picked those cities? No snow or ice or much inclement weather other than rain. It is not just scaling horizontally.

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#96

Post by vladimirralev »

ben_w wrote: post #87
fodkodrasz wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 welfar…

> 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. I disagree with the underlying presumption. We've been using animal labour since at least the domestication of wolves, and mechanical work since at least the ancient Greeks invented water mills. Even with re…

> With a fully automated economy, all 8 billion of us can have that

We probably can't. I mean why stop at humans? Let's give every pet the same luxury, or ... in the limit we could give this to every living being. Ultimately someone is going to draw the line who gets what and who is useful or not "for the greater good".

It just happens that many living beings don't contribute to the goals of whoever is in charge and if they get in the way or cause resource waste nobody will care about them, humans or not.

Human rights and democracy is all cool, but I think we just witnessed enough workarounds that render human rights and democracy pretty much null and void.

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#97

Post by nextaccountic »

Radim wrote: post #55
ActorNightly wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not really about "get rich", its about giving people the ability to bypass the middleman for pretty much anything that they rely on.

The "middleman" being other people, i.e. themselves from another's perspective. "These other people are useless, let's bypass them. But not me! I simply gain the ability to get anything I want." The lack of second-order thinking is hilarious.

The real issue is that we live in an economic system where people are exploited for labor, and in turn they buy products and services made with their own labor (and another class get to profit from it).

If we introduce AGI but keep the system, people will be unemployed. If people aren't employed (and instead machines do their jobs), then they can't buy stuff. The whole system crumbles.

But it's possible that AGI will be disruptive enough to completely change the system. Let's hope it's a change for the better.

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#98

Post by cesarb »

thrdbndndn wrote: post #57
3asdf123 wrote: post #31

I now come to realize that if you don't want to drive it's better to have public transport. For the real fun part of owning a personal vehicle: sport car, road-trip... I doubt you would want a robot to take over.

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…

> 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 station, say within a five-minute walk.

For a five-minute walk (or even a longer ten-minute or fifteen-minute walk), pulling a small cart is not exhausting at all. I do it every week when buying food: I choose one of the several supermarkets in one of the nearby blocks, walk to it pulling my empty cart, after paying for the goods I put everything into the cart, and walk back home pulling the full cart. No public transport needed, though I've seen people carrying these carts into public transport too (this is easier when it's a low-floor bus, instead of the high-floor ones).

You can also get things delivered when it's a larger amount than can fit on your cart: while paying at the supermarket you ask for delivery, and they'll use a cargo tricycle to bring it to your building.

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#99

Post by thrdbndndn »

cesarb wrote: post #98
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…

> 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 station, say within a five-minute walk. For a five-minute walk (or even a longer ten-minute or fifteen-minute walk), pulling a small cart is n…

> pulling a small cart

Ah, that's what I'm missing. Thanks for sharing your experience.

Re: Self-driving as a case study for AGI

#100

Post by jocoda »

Until recently I thought self driving was not going to happen. But in the early days of the car's history someone had to walk in front of the car as it went along, waving a red flag to warn people of this mechanical monstrosity.

And now we have substantial societal adaptations, both legal and structural to support ubiquitous vehicular transport.

Similar changes are on the way to support self driving. Our environment will be adapted to make it easier to implement self driving. And for that we won't need AGI.

Jaywalking is a crime thanks to the car. Who knows what we're not going to be allowed to do soon because of self driving.

Post reply on HN