3 ms·

That's a very interesting way of thinking about things, but I think unfortunately the search techniques we are using (gradient descent with certain datasets/sel

That's a very interesting way of thinking about things, but I think unfortunately the search techniques we are using (gradient descent with certain datasets/self-supervision tasks) limit us to exploring a very small subset of that 10TB of possible programs. A search strategy that could actually find the optimal 10TB program to accomplish some task would actually be a superintelligence beyond anything we have ever thought of creating using present day AI techniques.

shawnz 5y ago
Maybe one of the lesser search strategies will find a better search strategy? Isn't that how humans came around after all?
- visarga 5y ago
  Evolution used an entire planet and billions of years to come up with us.
bobthechef 5y ago
> find the optimal 10TB program to accomplish some task would actually be a superintelligence I am having a difficult time understanding what the operative meaning of "intelligence" here is. "AI" doesn't transcend the Turing machine. Intelligence doesn't mean more computer cycles per unit time either and compute cycles don't transcend the TM. What makes intelligence intelligence is what it can in principle do; speed is irrelevant. There is no essential difference between AI and non-AI.
FredPret 5y ago
But we want our search strategy to limit us to the infinitesimal fraction of programs that does useful work. 99.99% of possible bit arrangements in that 10TB will not do anything good, or useful, or even anything at all.
- margalabargala 5y ago
  The number possible bit arrangements in 10TB is 2 raised to the power of 80 trillion. This comes out to 3.1 × 10^24082399653118 To emphasize the size of that search space- let us measure the diameter of the observable universe in planck lengths, the shortest possible length. We would need over 24 trillion digits to write the number of universes we would need for the quantity of planck lengths to equal the number of possible programs. That 99.99% number is missing several billion additional 9s.
  - supperburg 5y ago
    Isn’t it incredible then that we have already found so many surprising programs in that set?
    - margalabargala 5y ago
      We are fortunately not searching that space with brute force.

shawnz 5y ago

Maybe one of the lesser search strategies will find a better search strategy? Isn't that how humans came around after all?

visarga 5y ago
Evolution used an entire planet and billions of years to come up with us.

bobthechef 5y ago

> find the optimal 10TB program to accomplish some task would actually be a superintelligence I am having a difficult time understanding what the operative meaning of "intelligence" here is. "AI" doesn't transcend the Turing machine. Intelligence doesn't mean more computer cycles per unit time either and compute cycles don't transcend the TM. What makes intelligence intelligence is what it can in principle do; speed is irrelevant. There is no essential difference between AI and non-AI.

FredPret 5y ago

But we want our search strategy to limit us to the infinitesimal fraction of programs that does useful work. 99.99% of possible bit arrangements in that 10TB will not do anything good, or useful, or even anything at all.

margalabargala 5y ago
The number possible bit arrangements in 10TB is 2 raised to the power of 80 trillion. This comes out to 3.1 × 10^24082399653118 To emphasize the size of that search space- let us measure the diameter of the observable universe in planck lengths, the shortest possible length. We would need over 24 trillion digits to write the number of universes we would need for the quantity of planck lengths to equal the number of possible programs. That 99.99% number is missing several billion additional 9s.
- supperburg 5y ago
  Isn’t it incredible then that we have already found so many surprising programs in that set?
  - margalabargala 5y ago
    We are fortunately not searching that space with brute force.