3 ms·

I think this article was a bit disingenuous. AGI? Please... And some actual examples would have also been nice, there is no reason not to include technical fin

I think this article was a bit disingenuous. AGI? Please... And some actual examples would have also been nice, there is no reason not to include technical findings knowing very well that their news post is going to be read mostly by people who have a degree of technical expertise themselves.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
truy766579 4y ago
The human perspective, the antropomorphic point of view of General Intelligence automatically spits that the true AGI will be just like a person. It will probably not be like a person. it could be an AGI for one run, after one prompt, then not an AGI for 10.000 prompts, then AGI again. It could be an AGI for five minutes while some sessions keeps being prompted by an active user, and the "memory" things keep the awareness/generality "alive" there in the neural network, then the sessions times out and the AGI level has been lost again. The lesson is, human way of "understanding" systems is not how the systems actually will, for certain, work.