You're talking about different problems. Story AI is basically having a writer sit down and writing a branching story tree with writing the whole way. At best it's a manually coded directed acyclic graph. Tactical AI, ie having the bad guy soldiers move about the battlefield and shooting back at you in a realistic manner is 100% about faking it. It's better to despawn non-visible and badly placed enemies and spawn we…
If you can find the link, please post it. I'm interested!
I appreciate your sentiment. This field is my focus right now. My bachelors is in BioChemMed but I am doing a master in CS and have finished many courses including the free ones by Hinton, LeCun, and Bengio. Here is my strongest prediction: AGI is only possible if the AGI is allowed to cause changes to its inputs. Current ML needs to be grafted towards attention mechanisms and more boltzmann net / finite/infinite imp…
> "... if AGI is allowed to cause changes to its inputs." Could you elaborate on this point ? Do you mean that the AGI could change the source of inputs, or change the actual content of those inputs (e.g. filtering) or both? And why do you think this is a critical piece ?
Both. Attention changes the source. Action interacts with the source, modifying it. But the environment will need to respond back. This is reminiscent of reinforcement training but is more traditional NN except where the input is dynamic and evolving with every batch not only in response to the agent but in response to differential equations or cellukar automata / some type of environment evolution. AGI should be able to change the environment in which it inhabits. Attention in some respects is a start - it is essentially equivalent to telling reality to move the page and watching it happen. Until we have attention AND data modification, we will keep getting the specialized NN we are used to.
I expect John Carmack to follow a trajectory of someone like David Ha who with little previous background started to write very creative and thought provoking papers ( https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=J1j92GsxVUMC&hl=en ) It won't be AGI by most definitions but I bet it'll be pretty cool and I'm happy to have that.
Dammit, I had the hypernetworks idea recently but he already did it 4 years ago! Nothing new under the sun...
Well that just means you capable of having good ideas. Just keep at it and I'm sure you'll do something great.
It's interesting that no one has mentioned that this is not unlike Jony Ive changing roles within Apple. It's just John's way of saying 'I'm leaving Facebook' without affecting the stock price.
> But, if this is a 100% replicated brain, doesn't that mean its suffering is just as real as a real brain's suffering, and therefor just as cruel? Yes, it does.
Or, assuming you don't believe in souls, "real" brain's suffering isn't real either. (The brain is just a machine, right?) This reminds me of the idea that free will doesn't exist, but that we have to act as if it were. So by analogy to that, maybe the AI isn't really suffering, but you have to act as if it were. More food for thought: Some surgery blocks memory but can be incredibly painful. Do we need to worry abou…
I think the word 'real' is way too vague in this context.
I'm also free to discuss my opinion! Stop trying to silence it.
Where did I take any action to 'silence' you? All I was suggesting was that to actively come into a discussion and say that what's being discussed is not worth discussing is, in my opinion , both unproductive & rude. Would you do that at a party? Join a discussion and tell people that what they're discussing is not worthy of discussion? Or would you do what most people do and wander off to find a discussion that is m…
Your analogy is broken. A party and a public forum are not comparable.
Moreover, if a member at a party was part of a cult I would probably try to bring them out of it.
How did you rule out other attributes in the voting, such as charisma, political environment, society wellness, etc?
The "voters" are not humans, but environments. A simple example of an environment would be a room with two buttons, one of which rewards you when you press it, and one of which punishes you when you press it. Independently of anything like charisma, society wellness, etc. If X figures this out quicker and pushes the "reward" button more often than Y, then we consider this simple environment to "vote" for X in the int…
I see. Instead of modeling the complexities, you simply record the choices picked by the adversarial entities in play.
> AlphaGo didn't learn the rules of Go. It has no idea what those rules are, it's just been trained through trial and error not to break them. That's not the same thing. It's not approaching chess or Go as an intelligent thinking being, learning the rules and working out their consequences There are indeed some people who learn chess by "reading the manual". Or learn a language by memorizing grammar rules. Or learn h…
In a Platonic dialogue, they discuss the definition of knowledge as "true belief with an account". You have true beliefs about language, but you don't know it in the Platonic sense if you can't explain it to someone else. Another way I've heard this defined is, you don't know it if you couldn't write the algorithm for it.
By that definition, most people don't have "knowledge" over most things which they believe and act on. And yet, no one accuses them of not possessing "general intelligence".
If an AI shows the same capabilities as the average human being, I would say that is AGI by definition. Regardless of whether it meets the requirement for Platonic Knowledge.
I loved it, but my issue with that game was severe motion sickness after 20-30 minutes... never finished it :(
Thanks for the warning, I cannot even play Minecraft. I wish Carmack had tackled motion sickness in VR/Games before switching to AI; he did talk about it in the interviews as being a limitation though. There's a need gap[1] to solve Simulation Sickness in VR and First Person games. [1]: https://needgap.com/problems/7-simulation-sickness-in-vr-and...
I was under the impression that simulation sickness was largely solved outside of extreme cases (like a vr portal game). I thought we're just waiting for hardware to catch up.
Years ago John said if you have 20k and a dedicated room you can make a convincing vr experience that won't make anyone sick.