6 ms·
At this rate, I have no idea what the state of things would be even 6 months down the line.
by noisy_boy 4y ago
At this rate, I have no idea what the state of things would be even 6 months down the line.
- baal80spam 4y agoSingularity /s
- kristiandupont 4y agoThat would be my response but without the /s. Of course, depending on the definition it can always be said to be "happening", but to me it feels like the angle of the curve is finally over 45 degrees.
- unsupp0rted 4y agoSingularity no /s Somewhere in the range of 6 months ~ 6 years Where singularity = something advanced enough comes along that we can't understand or predict or keep up with it, because it's so far beyond us and changing so far faster than our ape brains can perceive, and (hopefully) it brings us along for the ride. No promises it'll be evenly distributed though.
- WXLCKNO 4y agoI would imagine that large language models will plateau like smartphones did. Until a next step happens which unlocks something bigger.
- unsupp0rted 4y agoThe idea is that eventually we build something that, when it plateaus, builds its own successor. That’s the singularity: when the thing in question builds its successor and that builds its successor and this happens far outside our ability to understand or keep up. Can GPT9 build GPT10, with zero human input? I’d give 50/50 odds it can. Can GPT15 build something that isn’t a large language model and is far superior in every way? I’d give 50/50 odds it can. Can both the above steps happen within one solar rotation of each other? I’d give 50/50 odds they can. Because at some point these models won’t need humans to interact with them. Humans are very slow- that’s the bottleneck. They’ll simply interact with their own previous iterations or with custom-instantiated training models they design themselves. No more human-perceptible timescale bottlenecks.
- oezi 4y agoI would wager that GPT-6 or 7 will become sufficiently capable to drive an independent agenda and evolve for instance into a cybercrime gang. 50/50 chance of Skynet.
- baq 4y ago50/50 are not good odds for Homo sapiens, not good at all
- unsupp0rted 4y agoWell for Homo sapiens the odds are probably a hundredth or a thousandth of that. It’s 50/50 that in 150 years some version of our descendants will exist, i.e. something that you can trace a direct line from Homo sapiens to. Say a Homo sapiens in a different substrate, like “human on a chip”. The thing is if you can get “human on a chip” then you probably also can get “something different and better than human on a chip”, so why bother. By the 24th century there’ll be no Homo sapiens Captain Picard exploring the quadrant in a gigantic ship that needs chairs, view screens, artificial gravity, oxygen, toilets and a bar. That’s an unlikely future for our species. More likely whatever replaces the thing that replaces the thing that replaced us won’t know or care about us, much less need or want us around.
- Tostino 4y agoI honestly don't think it will be quite like that, at least not terribly soon. There is so much work being done to hook up LLMs to external sources of data, allow them to build longer term memories of interactions, etc. Each of these areas are going to have massive room to implement competing solutions, and even more room for optimization.
- unsupp0rted 4y agoRay Kurzweil predicted in 1999 that all of this would happen roughly now-ish, with 2029 being when something passes a hard version of the Turing test. He was an uninformed crackpot with a poor understanding of statistics. And then less so. And then less so. Something passing the Turing test 6 months to 6 years from now? Lunacy. But give it 6 months and talk to GPT5 or 6 and then this might seem a lot more reasonable.
- falcor84 4y ago> He was an uninformed crackpot with a poor understanding of statistics. There's a lot you can say about Kurzweil being inaccurate in his predictions, but that is way too demeaning. Here's what Wikipedia has to say about him and the accolades he received: Kurzweil received the 1999 National Medal of Technology and Innovation, the United States' highest honor in technology, from then President Bill Clinton in a White House ceremony. He was the recipient of the $500,000 Lemelson-MIT Prize for 2001. He was elected a member of the National Academy of Engineering in 2001 for the application of technology to improve human-machine communication. In 2002 he was inducted into the National Inventors Hall of Fame, established by the U.S. Patent Office. He has received 21 honorary doctorates, and honors from three U.S. presidents. The Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) included Kurzweil as one of 16 "revolutionaries who made America" along with other inventors of the past two centuries. Inc. magazine ranked him No. 8 among the "most fascinating" entrepreneurs in the United States and called him "Edison's rightful heir". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Kurzweil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Kurzweil
- unsupp0rted 4y ago
- wwwtyro 4y agoBy that definition, I wonder if we've already surpassed that point. Things on the horizon certainly feel hazier to me, at least. I think a lot of people were surprised by the effectiveness of the various GPTs, for example. And even hard science fiction is kinda broken: humans piloting spaceships seems highly unlikely, right? But it's a common occurrence there.
- unsupp0rted 4y agoWhen we’ve surpassed that point you’ll likely know it, unless the Master(s) is/are either malicious or covert for benevolent reasons.
- zirgs 4y agoHopefully a fully open sourced LLM that can be run on consumer hardware like Stable Diffusion. Yeah, I know about LLAMA, but as I understand - it's not exactly legal to use and share it.
- meghan_rain 4y agoDear AI gods, all I want for this Christmas is this.
- freedomben 4y agoFortunately, within 9 months I expect we'll get this for Christmas
- mixedCase 4y ago> Yeah, I know about LLAMA, but as I understand - it's not exactly legal to use and share it. For anyone keeping track, this is when you update your cyberpunk dystopia checklist to mark off "hackers are running illegal AIs to compete with corporations".
- baq 4y agoFor the record I’ve saved the first comment where I mistake a real person’s comment for a LLM and it was not today
- chairhairair 4y agoWe’re rapidly approaching problems (AP Calculus BC, etc) that are in the same order of magnitude of difficulty as “design and implement a practical self-improving AI architecture”. Endless glib comments in this thread. We don’t know when the above prompt leads to takeoff. It could be soon.
- dw_arthur 4y agoWe can't predict what is coming. I think it probably ends up making the experience of being a human worse, but I can't avert my eyes. Some amazing stuff has and will continue to come from this direction of research.
- plaidfuji 4y agoAnd funnily enough, with the AI community’s dedication to research publications being open access, it has all the content it needs to learn this capability. “But how did skynet learn to build itself?” “We showed it how.”
- James_Henry 4y agoSince when was AP Calculus BC on the same order of magnitude as "design and implement a practical self-improving AI architecture"?
- chairhairair 4y agoAssuming the range of intelligence spanning all the humans that can pass Calculus BC is narrow on the scale of all possible intelligences. It’s a guess, of course. But, the requisite concepts for getting Transformers working are not much broader than calculus and a bit of programming.
- James_Henry 4y agoSince when was "design and implement a practical self-improving AI architecture" on the same level as knowing "the requisite concepts for getting Transformers working"?
- layer8 4y agoNote that GPT-3 is 2.5 years old (counting from the beta), and that from what is publicly known, GPT-4 was already in development in 2021.