4 ms·

So in a contrived environment where the AI is given the ability to train on its attributes (aka same simulation framework, different layout). It can effectively

So in a contrived environment where the AI is given the ability to train on its attributes (aka same simulation framework, different layout). It can effectively explore the layout and complete tasks at the human level. Perhaps there’s only a few search algorithms and humans (and now this AI) are optimized to do it as well. One of my shower thoughts are that we’re effectively recreating the wheel with AI. Yes it can be immensely powerful and outperform humans for specific tasks. However, humans are generalized and evolved to interact with the real world independently. I imagine an AI would effectively match a human in this regard someday, but it’s worse as it can’t generate energy from eating some plants or animals (ie naturally occurring solar generated food). The interconnected nature will let AI have an advantage for many tasks, no doubt, but humans are pretty well optimized for the real world. Imo it’ll be hard to beat.

sebzim4500 4y ago
Isn't getting energy from food incredibly inefficient when you look at the entire system though? And while the plants themselves may be 'solar powered', the tractor used to plant them isn't. Neither is the factory where they made the fertilizer etc.
- ccozan 4y ago
  With a very few exceptions, all the energy on Earth is coming from the Sun, aka "solar power".
- akira2501 4y ago
  Well.. we are not a dead end for those nutrients, in that we excrete waste that isn't completely stripped of nutrition. This waste, treated properly, can be quite valuable to a variety of ecosystems.
belter 4y ago
All valid points. Then the title gets generalized as to "DeepMind AI as fast as humans in tasks not seen before..." missing the point of the constrained environment. This is the type of article that will do wonders for Google stock price, but nothing towards measuring if there is a leap forward on AI.
lostmsu 4y ago
> However, humans are generalized In terms of subject matters, ChatGPT is way more generalized than humans.
- pavlov 4y ago
  ChatGPT can only arrange symbols. It can’t wipe a floor or dissect an insect or drive a car or give a massage or make people listen and do what it wants. It can tell you often convincing stories about how to do those things, but it has no means to enact any of it nor any internal motivation to try.
  - wyager 4y ago
    > ChatGPT can only arrange symbols. This is what like half the people in first world countries do all day. > It can’t wipe a floor... There is no reason to suspect this is a technical limitation of the models we can build now, rather than a consequence of the fact that no one has bothered trying due to limitations on mechatronics. > but it has no means to enact any of it nor any internal motivation to try Any claims to this end are both/either A) purely speculative and B) ontologically nonsensical. It's also not really relevant.
    - breuleux 4y ago
      > There is no reason to suspect this is a technical limitation of the models we can build now, rather than a consequence of the fact that no one has bothered trying due to limitations on mechatronics. I think the point still stands, if mechatronics turn out to be a more difficult problem than intelligence: we will need new models to overcome these limitations.
    - akira2501 4y ago
      > This is what like half the people in first world countries do all day. Not by choice. That is an artifice of our institutions. > Any claims to this end are both/either A) purely speculative and B) ontologically nonsensical. It's also not really relevant. It's speculative, and it's nonsense, and it's not relevant. This claim itself is ontologically nonsensical.
sva_ 4y ago
> but it’s worse as it can’t generate energy from eating some plants or animals A machine can be worked 24/7 with no regard for their wellbeing whatsoever though.
- visarga 4y ago
  Ah you mean like our hearts and lungs? How dare we treat them like machines?
  - sva_ 4y ago
    Nah I mean more like the ethical implications. Humans have rights, AI (currently) does not.
- akira2501 4y ago
  Yes.. you just have to generate enough power 24/7 to keep it running. Does generating power have negative impacts for other peoples well being? AI will never be a free lunch.
chpatrick 4y ago
You can get an AI to do work for you at the click of a button at minimal cost. You can't do that with a human.
- astrange 4y ago
  Sure you can, it's the order button on Amazon.

sebzim4500 4y ago

Isn't getting energy from food incredibly inefficient when you look at the entire system though? And while the plants themselves may be 'solar powered', the tractor used to plant them isn't. Neither is the factory where they made the fertilizer etc.

ccozan 4y ago
With a very few exceptions, all the energy on Earth is coming from the Sun, aka "solar power".
akira2501 4y ago
Well.. we are not a dead end for those nutrients, in that we excrete waste that isn't completely stripped of nutrition. This waste, treated properly, can be quite valuable to a variety of ecosystems.

belter 4y ago

All valid points. Then the title gets generalized as to "DeepMind AI as fast as humans in tasks not seen before..." missing the point of the constrained environment. This is the type of article that will do wonders for Google stock price, but nothing towards measuring if there is a leap forward on AI.

lostmsu 4y ago

> However, humans are generalized In terms of subject matters, ChatGPT is way more generalized than humans.

pavlov 4y ago
ChatGPT can only arrange symbols. It can’t wipe a floor or dissect an insect or drive a car or give a massage or make people listen and do what it wants. It can tell you often convincing stories about how to do those things, but it has no means to enact any of it nor any internal motivation to try.
- wyager 4y ago
  > ChatGPT can only arrange symbols. This is what like half the people in first world countries do all day. > It can’t wipe a floor... There is no reason to suspect this is a technical limitation of the models we can build now, rather than a consequence of the fact that no one has bothered trying due to limitations on mechatronics. > but it has no means to enact any of it nor any internal motivation to try Any claims to this end are both/either A) purely speculative and B) ontologically nonsensical. It's also not really relevant.
  - breuleux 4y ago
    > There is no reason to suspect this is a technical limitation of the models we can build now, rather than a consequence of the fact that no one has bothered trying due to limitations on mechatronics. I think the point still stands, if mechatronics turn out to be a more difficult problem than intelligence: we will need new models to overcome these limitations.
  - akira2501 4y ago
    > This is what like half the people in first world countries do all day. Not by choice. That is an artifice of our institutions. > Any claims to this end are both/either A) purely speculative and B) ontologically nonsensical. It's also not really relevant. It's speculative, and it's nonsense, and it's not relevant. This claim itself is ontologically nonsensical.

sva_ 4y ago

> but it’s worse as it can’t generate energy from eating some plants or animals A machine can be worked 24/7 with no regard for their wellbeing whatsoever though.

visarga 4y ago
Ah you mean like our hearts and lungs? How dare we treat them like machines?
- sva_ 4y ago
  Nah I mean more like the ethical implications. Humans have rights, AI (currently) does not.
akira2501 4y ago
Yes.. you just have to generate enough power 24/7 to keep it running. Does generating power have negative impacts for other peoples well being? AI will never be a free lunch.

chpatrick 4y ago

You can get an AI to do work for you at the click of a button at minimal cost. You can't do that with a human.

astrange 4y ago
Sure you can, it's the order button on Amazon.