4 ms·

This a thousand million times. The mislabeling of LLMs and diffusion models as "artificial intelligence" is probably the biggest marketing blunder in the histo

This a thousand million times. The mislabeling of LLMs and diffusion models as "artificial intelligence" is probably the biggest marketing blunder in the history of technological progress, one that could ironically affect the course of AI alignment itself. Smart thinkers and policymakers are going to waste their time framing the problems the tech poses in terms of "an uncontrollable intelligence out to get us" like it's some kind of sentient overlord completely separate from humanity. But super-advanced technology that can operate in a closed loop (which could be called AGI depending on who's asked) isn't necessary for humanity to crater itself. What's required for such tech to come into existence in the first place? Humans. Who's going to be using it the whole time? Humans. And I think there's still a lot of disruptive, world-changing tech to be discovered before AGI is even a remote possibility. In reality this tech is probably going to be more like a superpowered exoskeleton for CEOs, politicians and the like to sway public discourse in their favor. "An uncontrollable intelligence" already describes the source of a lot of our current problems... that is, ourselves.

13years 4y ago
"An uncontrollable intelligence" already describes the source of a lot of our current problems... that is, ourselves. Yes, precisely. One of the best quotes I've seen was "Demonstrably unfriendly natural intelligence seeks to create provably friendly artificial intelligence" The whole ASI alignment theory is a paradox. What the AI researchers don't realize, is that they are simply building an uncomfortable mirror of human behavior.
pixl97 4y ago
Microsoft put out a 150 page paper yesterday on why GPT-4 is proto-AGI. LLM's are AI, now we're just closing the G gap.
- sdrinf 4y ago
  Link, please?
  - hikarudo 4y ago
    "Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4" https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712
- dreamcompiler 4y ago
  Microsoft is hardly an unbiased evaluator of anything built by OpenAI. And "closing the G gap" is like climbing to the top of a 10-foot ladder and saying "all that's left is to close the gap between here and the moon." AGI is much, much harder than a large language model. But then radically underestimating what it takes to get to AGI has been going on since the 1950s, so you're in good company.
tablespoon 4y ago
> And I think there's still a lot of disruptive, world-changing tech to be discovered before AGI is even a remote possibility. In reality this tech is probably going to be more like a superpowered exoskeleton for CEOs, politicians and the like to sway public discourse in their favor. Our current powers-that-be are so manifestly unsuited to have the kind of power our idiot technologists are desperate to build for them that part of me wishes for a disaster so bad that it knocks technological society off its feet, to the point were no one can build new computers for at least a couple generations. Maybe hitting the reset switch will give the future a chance to make better decisions.
jhbadger 4y ago
The meaning of "artificial intelligence" has always just been programs that can get results that previously only humans could do, until the moment programs can do it. For decades AI researchers worked on chess programs even though the best chess programs until 20 or so years ago couldn't even beat a skilled amateur. Now of course they can beat grandmasters. And so we decided chess wasn't "really AI". LLMs would have been mindblowing examples of AI even a decade ago. But because we now have them we can dismiss them as "not AI" like we did with chess programs. It's a never ending cycle.

13years 4y ago

"An uncontrollable intelligence" already describes the source of a lot of our current problems... that is, ourselves. Yes, precisely. One of the best quotes I've seen was "Demonstrably unfriendly natural intelligence seeks to create provably friendly artificial intelligence" The whole ASI alignment theory is a paradox. What the AI researchers don't realize, is that they are simply building an uncomfortable mirror of human behavior.

pixl97 4y ago

Microsoft put out a 150 page paper yesterday on why GPT-4 is proto-AGI. LLM's are AI, now we're just closing the G gap.

sdrinf 4y ago
Link, please?
- hikarudo 4y ago
  "Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4" https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712
dreamcompiler 4y ago
Microsoft is hardly an unbiased evaluator of anything built by OpenAI. And "closing the G gap" is like climbing to the top of a 10-foot ladder and saying "all that's left is to close the gap between here and the moon." AGI is much, much harder than a large language model. But then radically underestimating what it takes to get to AGI has been going on since the 1950s, so you're in good company.

tablespoon 4y ago

> And I think there's still a lot of disruptive, world-changing tech to be discovered before AGI is even a remote possibility. In reality this tech is probably going to be more like a superpowered exoskeleton for CEOs, politicians and the like to sway public discourse in their favor. Our current powers-that-be are so manifestly unsuited to have the kind of power our idiot technologists are desperate to build for them that part of me wishes for a disaster so bad that it knocks technological society off its feet, to the point were no one can build new computers for at least a couple generations. Maybe hitting the reset switch will give the future a chance to make better decisions.

jhbadger 4y ago

The meaning of "artificial intelligence" has always just been programs that can get results that previously only humans could do, until the moment programs can do it. For decades AI researchers worked on chess programs even though the best chess programs until 20 or so years ago couldn't even beat a skilled amateur. Now of course they can beat grandmasters. And so we decided chess wasn't "really AI". LLMs would have been mindblowing examples of AI even a decade ago. But because we now have them we can dismiss them as "not AI" like we did with chess programs. It's a never ending cycle.