3 ms·
This is what boiling a frog looks like. We have had year after year of astounding results. From LSTM horse and cart to Transformer combustion engines in the bli
by zarzavat 4y ago
This is what boiling a frog looks like. We have had year after year of astounding results. From LSTM horse and cart to Transformer combustion engines in the blink of an eye.
And yet people keep claiming that there’s nothing to worry about, AGI is very far away, it’s all going to fizzle out.
I don’t buy it. I challenge anyone to come up with a quantitative/objective measurement that shows progress in natural language/reasoning is decelerating.
What catches people out is that progress in AI is coming from a very oblique angle. People expect human-like progression of intelligence, from baby to toddler to child to adolescent. In humans basic reasoning develops first, then over our lifetime we learn knowledge to apply our reasoning to. But progress in AI is being made from the opposite direction: start with a model that knows vastly more than any human could ever know, then progressively improve its reasoning ability.
So allow me to make the opposing case. We are seeing a fundamental change in our reality. AGI is coming and it’s coming much faster than anyone expects.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- dougmwne 4y agoI will echo this. I don’t know if we will ever reach AGI, but several goalposts seem to have already flown past and we are still moving at top speed. I think it will take a decade or more to integrate the AI capabilities we have today into our economy. But until the tsunami of advancements abates, it’s impossible to guess how much our world will be changed by AI. Homework already seems to be a goner.
- fidgewidge 4y agoChollet's argument isn't about AGI or research progress. It's about business and real world impact of LLMs. He outlines two cases: 1. Bull case. LLMs become a kind of general speech/language interface to data. 2. Bear case. LLMs continue to be used primarily to automate customer support agents and help marketing people write blog posts, and within a few years become seen as a blockchain-like bubble: cool tech, not much real world impact. So you're not making an opposing case, because you're responding to a strawman argument that the article isn't about.