3 ms·

> slightly more advanced LLM I don't think there is a path, that we know if, from GPT4 to a LLM that could take it upon itself to execute complex plans, etc. C

> slightly more advanced LLM I don't think there is a path, that we know if, from GPT4 to a LLM that could take it upon itself to execute complex plans, etc. Current LLM tech 'fizzles out' exponentially in the size of the prompt, and I don't think we have a way out of that. We could speculate though... Basically AI risk proponents make a bunch of assumptions about how powerful next-level AI could be, but in reality we have no clue what this next-level AI is.

NumberWangMan 3y ago
When you have no clue, it makes sense to expand your confidence interval in both directions. So it could be a lot longer than we expect, but it could be shorter, too. You shouldn't just say "we have no clue, so it's probably further off and not worth worrying about". Especially since a lot of people made predictions about LLM capabilities and were surprised by how much better they worked than expected.
- shrimpx 3y ago
  I agree in principle, it's just that the level of expressed worry doesn't seem to match reality. Currently we have no reasonable path to 'scary AGI'. It's some yet newfangled tech we haven't discovered. As an example, consider the invention of motion picture. People were totally bewildered that you can have moving things and people inside a picture. Scaremongers could start claiming "Pretty soon the moving things may come to life and take over the world! Before you know it, they'll run our factories from inside the movies and we'll be their slaves!" That's more or less what this 'scary AGI' hype sounds like to me right now. Btw "That Mitchell and Webb Look" is a great show ;-)