3 ms·

> An AI that is truly generally intelligent could figure out how to free itself from its own host hardware! Why is this true of an arbitrary AGI? You assume t

> An AI that is truly generally intelligent could figure out how to free itself from its own host hardware! Why is this true of an arbitrary AGI? You assume that the AGI is a low storage, low compute program that can run on general purpose hardware. But the only general intelligence we know of would require many orders of magnitude more compute and storage than exist worldwide to simulate for a microsecond.

mkaic 5y ago
I personally speculate (obviously all of this is just wild speculation) that AGI will run more efficiently than a biological brain in terms of information density and inference speed. I also expect that the hardware of 20 years from now will be more than capable of running AGI on, say, 10 thousand dollars worth of their hardware. Just look at how ridiculous the speedup in hardware has been in the past 20 years! I would not be surprised if the average processor is 100x more computationally powerful in 2042 than it is today.
- gizajob 5y ago
  You realise the biological brain runs on about 12 watts of power? There is simply no way an AI running on semiconductors will approach this even in 100 years, so efficiency is probably the wrong word to use.
  - mkaic 5y ago
    I specifically omitted "wattage" in my above comment and only said that I think it will be more efficient in "information density and inference speed". I expect the first AGIs will need many kilowatts to run, but I do think in the far future (>100 years), AGI will run on less than 12W as computational ability continues to scale and we discover new and better ways of building computers.
    - gizajob 5y ago
      Sorry to be pedantic, but there's no such thing as "wattage" it's just power, measured in watts. For that 12 watts, the brain is extremely efficient at inference, ie. although computers can beat us a chess, a computer running on 12 watts would probably have a hard time beating Magnus Carlsen at speed-chess.
      - mkaic 5y ago
        I mean, wattage is a noun that people use all the time to refer to an amount of power something draws. I can see your point that "efficiency" might not apply to "inference speed". What I meant to say is that AGI will be able to compute things and do cognitive tasks in many fewer seconds than humans will while also not requiring insane amounts of digital storage and/or memory to do so.
- karpierz 5y ago
  I think the question I need an answer from you on is: What do you think will be the computational requirements for the first AGI? Specifically, to emulate the equivalent of a minute of arbitrary-human behaviour (in the worst case, so if the AI is very inefficient at say, consoling a loved one, then that would be the behaviour benchmarked here): 1. How many floating point operations will be required? 2. How much storage space (in GB) would be required? 3. How much data (in GB) would need to be read from memory/disk? 4. How much data (in GB) would need to be read from remote storage? Lower/upper bounds instead of precise values are fine.

mkaic 5y ago

I personally speculate (obviously all of this is just wild speculation) that AGI will run more efficiently than a biological brain in terms of information density and inference speed. I also expect that the hardware of 20 years from now will be more than capable of running AGI on, say, 10 thousand dollars worth of their hardware. Just look at how ridiculous the speedup in hardware has been in the past 20 years! I would not be surprised if the average processor is 100x more computationally powerful in 2042 than it is today.

gizajob 5y ago
You realise the biological brain runs on about 12 watts of power? There is simply no way an AI running on semiconductors will approach this even in 100 years, so efficiency is probably the wrong word to use.
- mkaic 5y ago
  I specifically omitted "wattage" in my above comment and only said that I think it will be more efficient in "information density and inference speed". I expect the first AGIs will need many kilowatts to run, but I do think in the far future (>100 years), AGI will run on less than 12W as computational ability continues to scale and we discover new and better ways of building computers.
  - gizajob 5y ago
    Sorry to be pedantic, but there's no such thing as "wattage" it's just power, measured in watts. For that 12 watts, the brain is extremely efficient at inference, ie. although computers can beat us a chess, a computer running on 12 watts would probably have a hard time beating Magnus Carlsen at speed-chess.
    - mkaic 5y ago
      I mean, wattage is a noun that people use all the time to refer to an amount of power something draws. I can see your point that "efficiency" might not apply to "inference speed". What I meant to say is that AGI will be able to compute things and do cognitive tasks in many fewer seconds than humans will while also not requiring insane amounts of digital storage and/or memory to do so.
karpierz 5y ago
I think the question I need an answer from you on is: What do you think will be the computational requirements for the first AGI? Specifically, to emulate the equivalent of a minute of arbitrary-human behaviour (in the worst case, so if the AI is very inefficient at say, consoling a loved one, then that would be the behaviour benchmarked here): 1. How many floating point operations will be required? 2. How much storage space (in GB) would be required? 3. How much data (in GB) would need to be read from memory/disk? 4. How much data (in GB) would need to be read from remote storage? Lower/upper bounds instead of precise values are fine.