3 ms·
At least we have lots of very complex simulated or pseudo-simulated environments already — throw your AGI agent into a sandbox mode game of GTA6, or like OpenAI
by keerthiko 4y ago
At least we have lots of very complex simulated or pseudo-simulated environments already — throw your AGI agent into a sandbox mode game of GTA6, or like OpenAI and DeepMind already did, with DOTA2 and StarCraft II (with non-G-AIs). They have a vast almost-analog simulation space to figure out and interact with (including identifying or coming up with a goal).
So while it is significant compute overhead, it at least doesn't have to be development overhead, and can often be CPU bound (headless games) while the AI learning compute can be GPU bound.
- paxys 4y agoI sure hope no one is planning to unleash their AGI in the real world after having it spend many (virtual) lifetimes playing GTA.
- keerthiko 4y agoIMO, your take in the broader sense is an extremely profound and important point for AGI ethics. While GTA is seemingly extreme, I think that's going to be a problem no matter what simulation space we fabricate for training AGI agents — any simulation environment will encourage various behaviors by the biases encoded by the simulation's selectively enforced rules (because someone has to decide what rules the simulation implements...). An advanced intelligence will take learnings and interpretations of those rules beyond what humans would come up with. If we can' make an AGI that we feel ok letting run amok in the world after living through a lot of GTA (by somehow being able to rapidly + intelligently reprioritize and adjust rules from multiple simulation/real environments? not sure), we probably shouldn't let that core AGI loose no matter what simulation(s) it was "raised on".