3 ms·
this is cool and all but it’s not even close to AGI. it’s a sophisticated gimmick. to go meta, I don’t believe that our way of approaching AI in general is goi
by mirceal 5y ago
this is cool and all but it’s not even close to AGI. it’s a sophisticated gimmick.
to go meta, I don’t believe that our way of approaching AI in general is going to get us to AGI.
Why?
Assume for a second that we could build something that could solve ANY problem.
What would happen next?
What does an intelligent human with zero emotions do? Nothing.
Fear of dying and the hardwired desire to pass on our genes (or to contribute something to society - which is just another way of shooting for immortality) is what drives us.
I predict that true AGI cannot come before a machine that has feelings, that is sentient.
We already have machines that do that. They’re called humans. It’s very arrogant of us thinking we can recreate in silicon what nature has evolved over eons. Not saying it’s not gonna happen - but not with the current approaches.
Also, a dog that speaks mediocre english? please. this is insulting to dogs and shows out tendency to anthropomorphize everything.
- Smoosh 5y agoI agree with your underlying premise - without stimuli such as pain and pleasure to give motivation it is difficult to foresee an AI which will think enough like humans to be useful or that we feel we can trust. But perhaps that is just chauvinism.
- mirceal 5y agogeneralized problem solving could be useful but it’s still going to be a tool that augments us. it will not replace us by any means. the game changer is not going to be AGI, it’s going to be human/machine symbiosis