3 ms·
Well, I am sure you can come up with some definition of AGI that already fits the kind of models we have now. But let's stick to a definition that resembles wha
by ifdefdebug 4y ago
Well, I am sure you can come up with some definition of AGI that already fits the kind of models we have now. But let's stick to a definition that resembles what most people would agree upon about what AGI is, as vague a definition as this might be.
And "nothing is keeping this from becoming" is quite a confident prediction of the future, which you said nobody could make. Well, maybe not, but how can you be so sure? There might be fundamental issues with current ML that you just can't scale away.
Remember mechanical computers? They were improved upon for decades, but there was no chance at all they would ever reach the completeness and computing power of modern electronic computers. A new paradigm was needed for that, transistors had to be invented.
The same might apply to current approach to "AI" through ML. Maybe, maybe not. So let me pull an old quote for all of you who claim current ML can evolve into AGI: Show me the code. Show me the program capable of running AGI on hardware which is basically still just flipping transistors. Then I believe you.
- throwaway71271 4y ago"Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." There is nothing scarier than to think that next word predictor can be sentient, because it means we are just next word predictors, and all our pain and suffering is beyond meaningless. In the same time I think there are definitions for AGI that can fuel exponential development in all important fields (from protein folding to medicine to enegry and etc), and this can just as well be a transformer large enough that has reasoning.
- venv 4y agoSorry, but you have a logical fallacy there (affirming the consequent). It does not follow, that humans and LLMs have all same properties, even if they have one same property. ("sentient being is text predictor" does not follow from "text predictor is sentient being").
- throwaway71271 4y agothat is true, I meant that if sentient being is a text predictor then it is possible to build sentience with a text predictor
- ifdefdebug 4y agoOk, so now that sentience is at the table, let me ask you again: show me the sentient code. And a program that takes a token sequence as input, does a single pass to produce an output token sequence, of which it does not hold any state, requiring you to append the output to the previous input to create the next token sequence to feed into the model, for the next single pass output sequence, rinse and repeat, is NOT going to do the job of becoming sentient, no matter how impressed you are by a natural language representation of the token sequence. Btw I an not scared, just unconvinced. And you arguing like a high priest with all that talk about pain and suffering ain't going to change that.
- qualudeheart 4y agoI could do it with genetic algorithms and scalage.