3 ms·

I am a bit worried that AGI as a goal post is too far already. We have this idea that once we get to AGI we stop research, or that’s when we put a pause and th

I am a bit worried that AGI as a goal post is too far already. We have this idea that once we get to AGI we stop research, or that’s when we put a pause and think about how we are going to use this technology responsibility. I think the issue is, if the computer is more intelligent and capable than 10% of people, then it will already vastly change our world (we’re probably close to this or surpassed it)

Dudester230518 3y ago
HN 2030: "Yes, humanity is being obliterated, but you see it's not a true AGI that is doing that."
- kelseyfrog 3y ago
  Open question: how many folks out there believe that fake AGI also poses a substantial risk if embodied/"let loose"? Even more risk than true AGI?
  - great_psy 3y ago
    Not sure what fake means in this context. Can you prove that any other person you know is generally intelligent, and not just a LLM spewing statistically relevant words ? You assume they are intelligent based on their actions and abilities, so I guess we will do the same with AI. Fake in this context is not any more dangerous than a con man (wants to harm, but it’s not competent), which is already pretty dangerous, but not as dangerous as somebody who is capable and interested in harming.
fds2342 3y ago
Besides the fact that no human being has a definition for consciusness nor a clear definition for what exactly would be "intelligence" (so in a way to be able to measure it in stuff around us, say dolphins or LLMs). It's fairly intuitive that LLMs are already super-intelligences, and if they don't stay "alive" continously, is just a matter of design. We could be one simple - as in bash - "while (null) do, done" of having a thing hardly distinguisable from AGI (even if it's not AGI, whatever you can get out of that "I" letter to precisely define it as being a real one or not). I'm sure most super-powers are already peaking a sight into the most confidential information inside OpenAI, DeepMind, Alibaba, Meta, whoever has these things running and keeping the details hidden from the general population. For I, I'd do it, just in case some wacko start to run some of the things inside a while loop, giving some kind of ability to retrain itself and/or access to the real world (Internet access or worst, ability to control drones to physically interact with the non-digital environments).

Dudester230518 3y ago

HN 2030: "Yes, humanity is being obliterated, but you see it's not a true AGI that is doing that."

kelseyfrog 3y ago
Open question: how many folks out there believe that fake AGI also poses a substantial risk if embodied/"let loose"? Even more risk than true AGI?
- great_psy 3y ago
  Not sure what fake means in this context. Can you prove that any other person you know is generally intelligent, and not just a LLM spewing statistically relevant words ? You assume they are intelligent based on their actions and abilities, so I guess we will do the same with AI. Fake in this context is not any more dangerous than a con man (wants to harm, but it’s not competent), which is already pretty dangerous, but not as dangerous as somebody who is capable and interested in harming.

fds2342 3y ago

Besides the fact that no human being has a definition for consciusness nor a clear definition for what exactly would be "intelligence" (so in a way to be able to measure it in stuff around us, say dolphins or LLMs). It's fairly intuitive that LLMs are already super-intelligences, and if they don't stay "alive" continously, is just a matter of design. We could be one simple - as in bash - "while (null) do, done" of having a thing hardly distinguisable from AGI (even if it's not AGI, whatever you can get out of that "I" letter to precisely define it as being a real one or not). I'm sure most super-powers are already peaking a sight into the most confidential information inside OpenAI, DeepMind, Alibaba, Meta, whoever has these things running and keeping the details hidden from the general population. For I, I'd do it, just in case some wacko start to run some of the things inside a while loop, giving some kind of ability to retrain itself and/or access to the real world (Internet access or worst, ability to control drones to physically interact with the non-digital environments).