> In fact, I wonder what would happen if we dedicated a supercomputer to running one single long-running session of a GPT3.5-sized LMM. Further, I wonder what w

> In fact, I wonder what would happen if we dedicated a supercomputer to running one single long-running session of a GPT3.5-sized LMM. Further, I wonder what would happen if we connected it to a robot body where it could control motors, read sensor/camera info, and generally interact with the world. We could then give this system a clock which ticks at regular intervals, where the AI system is simply prompted to perform some series of actions if it "wants". > This is all stuff we have the technology to do today. No, not even close. Language is a completely different domain from interacting with the physical world[0]. In fact they're wholly unrelated. LLMs are highly specific neural nets that have nothing to do with being able to interact with sensors or talk to motors. And how you would cross that bridge and hook the two up is completely unknown. It's like saying if we hooked up AlphaZero to a robotic arm it would suddenly know how to move the pieces on a physical chess board. If we performed the experiment you described exactly zero would happen because there's no capability for anything to happen other than create continuations of sentences. When I see comments like this on Hacker News with gross speculation I wonder how many people here in the comments section even have a basic understanding of the technology. 0: https://www.noemamag.com/ai-and-the-limits-of-language/ https://www.noemamag.com/ai-and-the-limits-of-language/