3 ms·
People think more of what we already have is going to go farther. 1 horse to the carriage gets you to the market. 2 horses to the next village. 4 to town and 6
by trabant00 5y ago
People think more of what we already have is going to go farther. 1 horse to the carriage gets you to the market. 2 horses to the next village. 4 to town and 6 cross states. Given enough horses we should reach the moon, right?
With absolutely no evidence (as none can be had about the future) I believe that AI can be reached with computers and programming languages as different from the current ones as rockets are to horses.
- qualudeheart 5y agoYou can launch a fast enough horse off a ramp and it’ll accelerate to escape velocity.
- alex-2k1 5y agoScientists in 50s expected to get language translation in 10 years as soon as computers will get enough computation power. They were real scientists, not "data AI scientists" who has little mathematics culture and not aware of any brain studies and problems in this field. But yeah, all aboard is hype train, we have a dog who speak English! Not a state machine that just do similar to what it was programmed on using statistics tricks. This is SO COOL!! PROGRAMMERS ARE DEAD!!!111 WOOOHOO SCIEEENCEEE!!
- gspr 5y agoWhile I echo some of these sentiments, I don't think they apply in the slightest to the author of the blog post this thread discusses. Certainly a "real scientist" in every sense.
- qualudeheart 5y agoAaronson doesn’t seem to believe in the scaling hypothesis like much of openAI and the Machine Intelligence Research Institute do. That’s the only hypothesis that predicts something like AGI from emerging from even bigger language models. Aaronson clearly isn’t expecting this tech to lead to AGI but that doesn’t make it not important.