10 ms·

« As our systems get closer to AGI… » That’s a pretty bold statement right there

by whiplash451 4y ago

harveywi 4y ago
They're gonna need a bigger trie.
outside1234 4y ago
This is just a schtick they are going to pull up until someone stupid buys them.
lkbm 4y ago
Certainly debatable how close it is, but it seems obvious that it's improving in general ability. It's surely not moving away from AGI.
- moffkalast 4y ago
  Maybe more of a slightly decaying orbit around AGI.
- robertlagrant 4y ago
  There doesn't seem to be any indication that we can make an AI that can drive, let alone do everything.
  - moffkalast 4y ago
    The scientists went too far. They wanted to make an AI that can drive, but ended up with an AI that can drivel.
  - BobbyJo 4y ago
    AIs can drive, just not as well as humans on all axi yet. They are better than humans on some axis in fact.
- underbluewaters 4y ago
  It's moving towards the local maxima of whatever this clever use of statistics and big data can manage. People who realize these models are in a different category than AGI and how our brains work will be in a better position to maximize their utility.
  - maxilevi 4y ago
    Why wouldn't be possible that our brains are just a dense and efficient statistical machine doing pattern matching?
    - mdp2021 4y ago
      The "«pattern matching»" intelligent entities do refines those very patterns. There is an _action_ there, a module, a function, that has to be working.
  - maxdoop 4y ago
    I see this comment often, but cannot understand how our brains are that different even that what an LLM does. Do we not "consume" enormous amounts of data, then predict what to do/say next based on that data? Is that not what an LLM is doing? Note that I'm not saying LLMs are sentient or anything (however, I have thoughts on sentience in general). I am simply saying there's an obvious similarity between how humans think and LLMs -- and for whatever reason, so many people think we are special simply because we are "made of meat".
- ly3xqhl8g9 4y ago
  Since we have little idea (with lots of noise) of what intelligence is, how cells develop and use it, Large Language Models, Generative Diffusion, and all the other architectures could move away from AGI and we have no benchmark to check it. A certain thing is that the current architectures are giving rise to artificial savants: an amazing ability to generate/hallucinate a story, some lines of code, or an image from a few words, but hilariously unable to distinguish between inside/outside and similar concepts which the simplest single-cell "knows" how to handle. It's not clear whether these architectures could give rise to an agent, nothing extra-ordinary, but merely able to explore various spaces without getting stuck [1]. One other aspect is the business side: in the following years lots of buzzwords will be flying around and most to all of the entities involved in statistical learning applications will get stuck in a local minimum worth somewhere between $10 billion to $10 trillion: shareholders care about, well, shares, not AGI. Another invariant in the technological race is that the worst technology will always win in the short to medium term: in Ancient Greece slavery was preferred to the steam engine [2], in 1900 the internal combustion engine won, not the more logical electric vehicle, today we have Windows and MacOS as major operating systems, not Plan9, and so forth. [1] Michael Levin, From physics to mind, timestamp discussing Xenobots, https://youtu.be/_QICRPFWDpg?t=1343 https://youtu.be/_QICRPFWDpg?t=1343 [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeolipile https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeolipile
- mdp2021 4y ago
  > It's surely not moving away It is surely moving away from AGI. The implementations go in the opposite direction. As already expressed: "Intelligence is evolving a world model through critical consideration. Unintelligence is acritical disconnected repetition".
- corbulo 4y ago
  You could argue increasing the constraints on a LLM would actually be restricting it from becoming AGI (whatever it even means).
credit_guy 4y ago
I don't know about you, but as far as I'm concerned ChatGPT passes the Turing test with flying colors. I even told him (?) that, and the response was quite humble: Me: by the way, if I may add something tangential, in my opinion you pass the Turing test 100% ChatGPT: Thank you for the compliment! However, as an AI language model, I am not capable of passing the Turing test in the strict sense, as the Turing test requires fooling a human judge into believing that the AI is a human. While I strive to generate responses that are human-like and informative, I am still fundamentally a machine, and my responses are generated by algorithms rather than human thought processes.
- mdp2021 4y ago
  The «Turing test» cannot be interpreted as a suggestion that trickery fits the purpose (of replacing actual, real properties). The "Imitation game" was introduced in the context of an explicitly very relaxed interpretation of "thinking" - broad to encompass the criticism of superficial cultural positions - in the question "«Can machines think?»". The "Imitation game" has the purpose of deciding that "we could say that machines can think in a shallow sense of the term", for the purpose of stating a positive (positively negative) idea that "we cannot exclude that machines can potentially think". This does not make a "fooling" machine intelligent.
  - mdp2021 4y ago
    Next time you intend to raise disapproval, renegade sniper, do also spend the time to articulate it.
- kilgnad 4y ago
  The fact of the matter is, everybody understands the low level model of LLMs but nobody truly and fully understands the emergent macro effect. Even though it has a lot of really stupid responses there's still a huge number of astonishing output that's incredibly hard to attribute to anything else other than intelligence and understanding. I find it puzzling that people can be so vehemently adamant to downplay chatGPT as if they know what's going on. They don't. The creators of chatGPT wrote this article and it's partially an admission of this themselves, but obviously an armchair expert on HN who's never implemented an LLM as far reaching as chatGPT knows way better. We can't say whether or not chatGPT is a step towards AGI. That much is true. But the astonishing thing about this iteration of AI is that we can no longer say if it's not a step either. We just don't know.
riku_iki 4y ago
preparing for next 10B round.
babblingfish 4y ago
I'm glad I am not the only one who thought this was complete and total BS. I agree with other commenters that this post is designed to create hype and acquire more funding. Many people have argued (successfully imo) that AGI is not even possible[1]. LLMs are not even trending in the direction of AGI. They are trending in the direction of annoying spam[2] and making our jobs harder[3]. A brave new world where anyone can generate hallucinated nonsense and feel clever for doing so. [1] Why general artificial intelligence will not be realized https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-020-0494-4 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-020-0494-4 [2]A sci-fi magazine has cut off submissions after a flood of AI-generated stories https://www.npr.org/2023/02/24/1159286436/ai-chatbot-chatgpt-magazine-clarkesworld-artificial-intelligence https://www.npr.org/2023/02/24/1159286436/ai-chatbot-chatgpt... [3]CheatGPT https://blog.humphd.org/cheatgpt/ https://blog.humphd.org/cheatgpt/
- mdp2021 4y ago
  That infamous article from the Humanities and Social Sciences dept is countered through the simple note that machines can surely have input interfaces.
famouswaffles 4y ago
Only if you're hellbent on the nonsensical "parrot" argument. It's fairly obvious right now all the major pieces for Human Level AGI are here. Just needs to be put it together and that's going to happen in the next few years tops. I swear you'll have people tell you it's just "clever statistics" as they're being gunned down by skynet.
- lame-robot-hoax 4y ago
  What are the major pieces, and how does stringing them together solve AGI?
  - famouswaffles 4y ago
    If https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.03728 https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.03728 And https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.00923 https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.00923 Is anything to go by then Large Scale + Language + Multimodality + RLHF + Toolformers

« As our systems get closer to AGI… » That’s a pretty bold statement right there

harveywi 4y ago

They're gonna need a bigger trie.

outside1234 4y ago

This is just a schtick they are going to pull up until someone stupid buys them.

lkbm 4y ago

Certainly debatable how close it is, but it seems obvious that it's improving in general ability. It's surely not moving away from AGI.

moffkalast 4y ago
Maybe more of a slightly decaying orbit around AGI.
robertlagrant 4y ago
There doesn't seem to be any indication that we can make an AI that can drive, let alone do everything.
- moffkalast 4y ago
  The scientists went too far. They wanted to make an AI that can drive, but ended up with an AI that can drivel.
- BobbyJo 4y ago
  AIs can drive, just not as well as humans on all axi yet. They are better than humans on some axis in fact.
underbluewaters 4y ago
It's moving towards the local maxima of whatever this clever use of statistics and big data can manage. People who realize these models are in a different category than AGI and how our brains work will be in a better position to maximize their utility.
- maxilevi 4y ago
  Why wouldn't be possible that our brains are just a dense and efficient statistical machine doing pattern matching?
  - mdp2021 4y ago
    The "«pattern matching»" intelligent entities do refines those very patterns. There is an _action_ there, a module, a function, that has to be working.
- maxdoop 4y ago
  I see this comment often, but cannot understand how our brains are that different even that what an LLM does. Do we not "consume" enormous amounts of data, then predict what to do/say next based on that data? Is that not what an LLM is doing? Note that I'm not saying LLMs are sentient or anything (however, I have thoughts on sentience in general). I am simply saying there's an obvious similarity between how humans think and LLMs -- and for whatever reason, so many people think we are special simply because we are "made of meat".
ly3xqhl8g9 4y ago
Since we have little idea (with lots of noise) of what intelligence is, how cells develop and use it, Large Language Models, Generative Diffusion, and all the other architectures could move away from AGI and we have no benchmark to check it. A certain thing is that the current architectures are giving rise to artificial savants: an amazing ability to generate/hallucinate a story, some lines of code, or an image from a few words, but hilariously unable to distinguish between inside/outside and similar concepts which the simplest single-cell "knows" how to handle. It's not clear whether these architectures could give rise to an agent, nothing extra-ordinary, but merely able to explore various spaces without getting stuck [1]. One other aspect is the business side: in the following years lots of buzzwords will be flying around and most to all of the entities involved in statistical learning applications will get stuck in a local minimum worth somewhere between $10 billion to $10 trillion: shareholders care about, well, shares, not AGI. Another invariant in the technological race is that the worst technology will always win in the short to medium term: in Ancient Greece slavery was preferred to the steam engine [2], in 1900 the internal combustion engine won, not the more logical electric vehicle, today we have Windows and MacOS as major operating systems, not Plan9, and so forth. [1] Michael Levin, From physics to mind, timestamp discussing Xenobots, https://youtu.be/_QICRPFWDpg?t=1343 https://youtu.be/_QICRPFWDpg?t=1343 [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeolipile https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeolipile
mdp2021 4y ago
> It's surely not moving away It is surely moving away from AGI. The implementations go in the opposite direction. As already expressed: "Intelligence is evolving a world model through critical consideration. Unintelligence is acritical disconnected repetition".
corbulo 4y ago
You could argue increasing the constraints on a LLM would actually be restricting it from becoming AGI (whatever it even means).

credit_guy 4y ago

I don't know about you, but as far as I'm concerned ChatGPT passes the Turing test with flying colors. I even told him (?) that, and the response was quite humble: Me: by the way, if I may add something tangential, in my opinion you pass the Turing test 100% ChatGPT: Thank you for the compliment! However, as an AI language model, I am not capable of passing the Turing test in the strict sense, as the Turing test requires fooling a human judge into believing that the AI is a human. While I strive to generate responses that are human-like and informative, I am still fundamentally a machine, and my responses are generated by algorithms rather than human thought processes.

mdp2021 4y ago
The «Turing test» cannot be interpreted as a suggestion that trickery fits the purpose (of replacing actual, real properties). The "Imitation game" was introduced in the context of an explicitly very relaxed interpretation of "thinking" - broad to encompass the criticism of superficial cultural positions - in the question "«Can machines think?»". The "Imitation game" has the purpose of deciding that "we could say that machines can think in a shallow sense of the term", for the purpose of stating a positive (positively negative) idea that "we cannot exclude that machines can potentially think". This does not make a "fooling" machine intelligent.
- mdp2021 4y ago
  Next time you intend to raise disapproval, renegade sniper, do also spend the time to articulate it.
kilgnad 4y ago
The fact of the matter is, everybody understands the low level model of LLMs but nobody truly and fully understands the emergent macro effect. Even though it has a lot of really stupid responses there's still a huge number of astonishing output that's incredibly hard to attribute to anything else other than intelligence and understanding. I find it puzzling that people can be so vehemently adamant to downplay chatGPT as if they know what's going on. They don't. The creators of chatGPT wrote this article and it's partially an admission of this themselves, but obviously an armchair expert on HN who's never implemented an LLM as far reaching as chatGPT knows way better. We can't say whether or not chatGPT is a step towards AGI. That much is true. But the astonishing thing about this iteration of AI is that we can no longer say if it's not a step either. We just don't know.

riku_iki 4y ago

preparing for next 10B round.

babblingfish 4y ago

I'm glad I am not the only one who thought this was complete and total BS. I agree with other commenters that this post is designed to create hype and acquire more funding. Many people have argued (successfully imo) that AGI is not even possible[1]. LLMs are not even trending in the direction of AGI. They are trending in the direction of annoying spam[2] and making our jobs harder[3]. A brave new world where anyone can generate hallucinated nonsense and feel clever for doing so. [1] Why general artificial intelligence will not be realized https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-020-0494-4 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-020-0494-4 [2]A sci-fi magazine has cut off submissions after a flood of AI-generated stories https://www.npr.org/2023/02/24/1159286436/ai-chatbot-chatgpt-magazine-clarkesworld-artificial-intelligence https://www.npr.org/2023/02/24/1159286436/ai-chatbot-chatgpt... [3]CheatGPT https://blog.humphd.org/cheatgpt/ https://blog.humphd.org/cheatgpt/

mdp2021 4y ago
That infamous article from the Humanities and Social Sciences dept is countered through the simple note that machines can surely have input interfaces.

famouswaffles 4y ago

Only if you're hellbent on the nonsensical "parrot" argument. It's fairly obvious right now all the major pieces for Human Level AGI are here. Just needs to be put it together and that's going to happen in the next few years tops. I swear you'll have people tell you it's just "clever statistics" as they're being gunned down by skynet.

lame-robot-hoax 4y ago
What are the major pieces, and how does stringing them together solve AGI?
- famouswaffles 4y ago
  If https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.03728 https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.03728 And https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.00923 https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.00923 Is anything to go by then Large Scale + Language + Multimodality + RLHF + Toolformers