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

OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

961–970 of 1001 posts

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#961

Post by HarHarVeryFunny »

93po wrote: post #926
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #896

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expect self-consistency might be one useful reward function. Of course in the real world, for a real intelligent system, reality is the feedback/reward system, but for an LLM limited to it's training set, with nothing to ground it, maybe this is the best you can do ... The idea is essentially that you need to assume (but of course GI-GO) that most of the training data is factual/reasonable whether in terms of facts…

Maybe I’m off mark here but it seems like video footage of real life would be a massively beneficial data set because it can watch these videos and predict what will happen one second into the future and then see if it was correct. And it can do this over millions of hours of footage and have billions of data points.

Yes - that would help, but only to limited degree if just part of training set.

1) Really need runtime prediction feedback, not just pretraining

2) Really need feedback on results of one's own (prediction-driven) actions (incl. speech), not just on passive "what will happen next" observations

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#962

Post by Jeff_Brown »

qsort wrote: post #761
seanhunter wrote: post #735

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a general result in machine learning known as "the bitter lesson"[1], which is that methods which come from specialist knowledge tend to be beaten by methods which rely on brute force computation in the long run because of Moore's law and the ability to scale things by distributed computing. So the reason people don't use the "add instruction"[2] for example is that over the last 70 years of attempting to bu…

As someone with a CS background myself, I don't think this is what GP was talking about. Let's forget for a moment that stuff has to run on an actual machine. If you had to represent a quadratic equation, would you rather write: (a) x^2 + 5x + 4 = 0 (b) the square of the variable plus five times the variable plus four equals zero When you are trying to solve problems with a level of sophistication beyond the toy stuf…

Ideally we'd have both worlds -- but if we're aiming for AGI and we have to choose, using a language that lets you encode everything seems preferable to one that only lets you talk about, say, constrained maximization problems.

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#963

Post by sroussey »

sroussey wrote: post #623
adastra22 wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to this article Sam has been telling the board that this new advance is not AGI and not anything to worry about (so they can keep selling it to MSFT), then the researchers involved went behind Sam's back and reported to the board directly, claiming that they'd created something that could-maybe-be AGI and it needs to be locked down. That's the claim at least.

If that research team is unwanted at OpenAI, I know places they can go with coworkers writing to their boss’s boss.

I meant to have the word not in there. Kinda changes the meaning

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#964

Post by Jeff_Brown »

wegfawefgawefg wrote: post #956
smeej wrote: post #952

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why would we teach kids maths then, when they can use a calculator? It's much easier and faster for them. I am five years older than my brother, and we happened to land just on opposite sides of when children were still being taught mental arithmetic and when it was assumed they would, in fact, have calculators in their pockets. It drives him crazy that I can do basic day-to-day arithmetic in my head faster than he…

Skull has limited volume. What room is unused by one capacity may be used by another.

Is this intuition scientifically supported? I've read that people who remember every detail of their lives tend not to have spectacular intelligence, but outside of that extreme I'm unaware of having seen the tradeoff actually bite. And there are certainly complementarities in knowledge -- knowing physics helps with chemistry, knowing math and drama both help with music, etc.

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#965

Post by Jeff_Brown »

wegfawefgawefg wrote: post #957
sgt101 wrote: post #774

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can LLM's compute any computable function? I thought that an LLM can approximate any computable function, if the function is within the distribution that it is are trained on. I think it's jolly interesting to think about different axiomizations in this context. Also we know that LLM's can't do a few things - arithmetic, inference & planning are in there. They look like they can because they retrieve discussions from…

ML still cant do sin. Functions that repeat periodically.

To err is human, after all.

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#966

Post by spurgu »

jacquesm wrote: post #916
jiggawatts wrote: post #727

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything you said about LLMs being "terrible at X" is true of the current generation of LLM architectures. From the sound of it, this Q* model has a fundamentally different architecture, which will almost certainly make some of those issues not terrible any more. Most likely, the Q* design is the very similar to the one suggested recently by one of the Google AI teams: doing a tree search instead of greedy next tok…

> We all thought Chess was impossible for computers until it wasn't. I don't know who 'we' is but Chess was a program for computers before computers powerful enough existed with the hardware represented by people computing the next move. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turochamp

The point was to not overvalue the superiority of humans, not that chess engines didn't exist.

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#967

Post by yashap »

Strom wrote: post #326
cduzz wrote: post #316

I was talking to my (12 year old) son about parts of math he finds boring. He said that he thinks absolute value is absurdly easy and extremely boring. I asked him if there was anything that might make it more interesting, he said "maybe complex numbers". So I asked him "what would the absolute value of i+1 be?" he thinks for a little bit and says "square root of 2" and I ask him "what about the absolute value of 2i…

The large language models will read your comment here and remember the answer.

Hah, I asked ChatGPT, and yeah, it nailed it: https://chat.openai.com/share/f1bfed28-4451-4fac-8bac-1386fe...

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#968

Post by robwwilliams »

trashtester wrote: post #925
RamblingCTO wrote: post #789

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still believe that A(G)I will consist of subsystems and different network architectures (if NN's are the path to that), just like we humans have.

Many of the "specialist" parts of the brain are still made from cortical columns, though. Also, they are in many cases partly interchangeable, with some reduction in efficiency. Transformers may be like that, in that they can do generalized learning from different types of input, with only minor modifications needed to optimize for different input (or output) modes.

Cortical columns are one part of much more complex systems of neural compute that at a minimum includes recursive connections with thalamus, hypothalamus, midbrain, brainstem nuclei, cerebellum, basal forebrain, — and the list goes on.

So it really does look like a society of networks, all working in functional synchrony (parasynchrony might be a better word) with some firms of “consciousness” updated in time slabs of about 200-300 milliseconds.

LLMs are probably equivalent now to Wernicke’s and Broca’s areas, but much more is needed “on top” and “on bottom”—-motivation, affect, short and longterm memory, plasticity of synaptic weighting and dynamics, and perhaps most important, a self-steering attentional supervisor or conductor. That attentional driver system is what we probably mean by consciousness.

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#969

Post by nopromisessir »

aaronax wrote: post #831
nopromisessir wrote: post #814

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All those things sound very boring to me. I can offer no concrete solutions. However, I have a friend who graduated from high school #1 of a big class and 2 years early. His mom explained that if he made at least a 1400(of 1600) on his SAT, she would buy him a new gaming computer. He then proceeded to make exactly a 1400. No more. No less. I recommend if you haven't tried already, an iteration to this approach using…

I scored 32 on the Act which was one of the highest scored in the high school, if not the highest. My parents thought I could do better and that it would be worth it, so they offered a new hunting rifle if I improved my score. Got a 35 on the retake and got a super nice Sako rifle and scope--IIRC a little over $1000 in 2005.

Haha well done.

I like the iterative approach. Perhaps we can ammend the test case with advice to keep the receipt for the first video card and offer an upgrade to a 4070ti on the retake or whatnot.

Or bigger/better boom stick on the retake or whatnot.

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#970

Post by vidarh »

mk67 wrote: post #881
vidarh wrote: post #858

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intelligence must inherently be a function unless there is a third form of cause-effect transition that can't be modelled as a function of determinism and randomness.

Functions are by definition not random. Randomness would break: "In mathematics, a function from a set X to a set Y assigns to each element of X exactly one element of Y"

"Function" has (at least) two meanings. The last clause is not talking about functions in the mathematical sense. It could have been worded clearer, sure.
Post reply on HN