6 ms·
I don’t think iterations on the current machine learning approaches will lead to a general artificial intelligence. I do think eventually we’ll get there, and t
by eloff 4y ago
I don’t think iterations on the current machine learning approaches will lead to a general artificial intelligence. I do think eventually we’ll get there, and that these kinds of concerns won’t matter. There is no way to defend against a superior hostile actor over the long term. We have to be 100%, and it just needs to succeed once. It will be so much more capable than we are. AGI is likely the final invention of the human race. I think it’s inevitable, it’s our fate and we are running towards it. I don’t see a plausible alternative future where we can coexist with AGI. Not to be a downer and all, but that’s likely the next major step in the evolution of life on earth, evolution by intelligent design.
- worldsayshi 4y ago> There is no way to defend against a superior hostile actor That's part of my reasoning. That's why we should make sure that we have built a non-hostile relationship with AI before that point.
- rescripting 4y agoProbably futile. An AGI by definition is capable of self improvement. Given enough time (maybe not even that much time) it would be orders of magnitude smarter than us, just like we're orders of magnitude smarter than ants. Like an ant farm, it might keep us as pets for a time but just like you no longer have the ant farm you did when you were a child, it will outgrow us.
- wincy 4y agoMaybe we’ll get lucky and all our problems will be solved using friendship and ponies. (Warning this is a weird read, George Hotz shared it on his Twitter awhile back) https://www.fimfiction.net/story/62074/friendship-is-optimal https://www.fimfiction.net/story/62074/friendship-is-optimal
- worldsayshi 4y agoRight now AI is the ant. Later we'll be the ants. Perfect time to show how to treat ants.
- colinflane 4y agoPerhaps we will be the new cats and dogs https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262539517/novacene/ https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262539517/novacene/
- astrange 4y ago> An AGI by definition is capable of self improvement. Just because you can imagine something and define that something has magic powers doesn't mean that the magic powers can actually exist in real life. Are you capable of "self improvement"? (In this AGI sense, not meant as an insult.)
- adamisom 4y ago.. what? Us humans are capable of self-improvement, but we’re also a kludge of biases through which reason has miraculously found a tiny foothold. We’re talking about a potential intelligence with none of our hardware limitations or baggage. Self-improve? My brother in Christ, have you heard of this little thing called stochastic gradient descent?
- boppo1 4y agoWhy do people use the phrase 'My brother in Christ' so often all of a sudden? Typically nonbelievers and the non observant.
- astrange 4y ago> Us humans are capable of self-improvement No, you're capable of learning things. You can't do brain surgery on yourself and add in some more neurons or fix Alzheimer's. What you can do is have children, which aren't you. Similarly if an AI made another bigger AI, that might be a "child" and not "them". > We’re talking about a potential intelligence with none of our hardware limitations or baggage. In this case the reason it doesn't have any limitations is because it's imaginary. All real things have limitations. > Self-improve? My brother in Christ, have you heard of this little thing called stochastic gradient descent? Do you think that automatically makes models better?
- adamisom 4y ago>> Us humans are capable of self-improvement > No, you're capable of learning things. You can't do brain surgery on yourself What principle do you have for defining self-improvement the way that you do? Do you regard all software updates as "not real improvement"? >All real things have limitations. Uh, yep, that doesn't mean it will be as limited as us. To spell it out: yes, real things have limitations, but limitations vary between real things. There's no "imaginary flawless" versus "everything real has exactly the same amount of flawed-ness".
- ben_w 4y agoIt might work, given how often "please" works for us and is therefore also in training data, but it certainly isn't guaranteed.
- eloff 4y agoI can be confident we’ll screw that up. But I also wouldn’t want to bet our survival as a species on how magnanimous the AI decides to be towards its creators.
- boppo1 4y agoWell, the guys on 4chan are making great strides toward a , uh, "loving" relationship.
- tomcam 4y agoI am more concerned about supposedly nonhostile actors, such as the US government
- eloff 4y agoOver the short term, sure. Over the long term, nothing concerns me more than AGI. I’m hoping I won’t live to see it. I’m not sure my hypothetical future kids will be as lucky.
- dr_dshiv 4y agoDid you see that Microsoft Research claims that it is already here? https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.12712.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.12712.pdf
- kristofferR 4y agoAs they discuss in the study, it depends on the definition of AGI, GPT-4 is not an AGI if the more stringent definitions are used.
- quonn 4y agoAGI is still just an algorithm and there is no reason why it would „want“ anything at all. Unlike perhaps GPT-* which at least might pretend to want something because is trained on text based on human needs.
- eloff 4y agoAGI is a conscious intelligent alien. It will want things the same way we want things. Different things, certainly, but also some common ground is likely too. The need for resources is expected to be universal for life.
- messe 4y agoIt’s an intelligent alien, probably; but let’s not pretend the hard problem of consciousness if solved.
- pixl97 4y agoThe hard problem of consciousness is only hard when you look at it running on meat hardware. In a computer system we'll just go "that's the simulation it's executing currently" and admit avoid saying differences in consciousness exist.
- numpad0 4y agoWhat these guys are talking about is: “intelligent alien might decide to kill us so we must kill them first” vs “can you please cut out that clinical paranoia”
- melagonster 4y agoexcept we have so many companies is trying to create them.
- quonn 4y agoFor us the body and the parts of the brain for needs are there first - and the modern brain is in service to that. An AI is just the modern brain. Why would it need anything?
- bsenftner 4y agoYou assume agency, a will of its own. So far, we've proven it is possible to create (apparent) intelligence without any agency. That's philosophically new, and practically perfect for our needs.
- arcticfox 4y agoAs soon as it's given a task though, it's off to the races. No AI philosopher but it seems like while now it can handle "what steps will I need to do to start a paperclip manufacturing business", someday it will be able to handle "start manufacturing paperclips" and then who knows where it goes with that
- bsenftner 4y agoThat outcome assumes the AI is an idiot while simultaneously assumes it is a genius. The world being consumed by a paper clip manufacturing AI is a silly fable.
- Brometheus 4y agoBasically solved. > Be friendly.