4 ms·
intelligence with no influence on the real world (and currently not even any form of long-term memory) is a lot less dangerous.
by pantalaimon 3y ago
intelligence with no influence on the real world (and currently not even any form of long-term memory) is a lot less dangerous.
- famouswaffles 3y agoIn recent months there's been a general direction to grant LLMs more and more agency, embodiment and tool control. They're being "plugged" into everything. Palantir even has a military use LLM they're excitedly showcasing. They're several popular repos that give control of your terminal and browser to LLMs. The moment we built something showcasing strong general intelligence, we began to use it to make cognitive decisions and take actions in our stead. Now an LLM browses the web for you. And as soon as June with Windows, it'll take actions on your computer for you as well. If anything this recent LLM era has shown, it's that general AI won't need to escape any "box" because two sides will be missing. I don't think the idea that whatever Super Intelligence we build won't have influence on the real world will pan out at all. Even the most isolated form of Super Intelligence will have Humans taking instructions from it. Instructions that you won't really be able to verify is ultimately for your own good.
- Tostino 3y agoCompletely agree here. And the fact of the matter is, long term memory is actively being worked on. You can already approximate reasonably with a Vector DB and embeddings, feeding the relevant results into the context. As is increasing the "working memory" (context size) in a more efficient manner: https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.16300 https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.16300 This isn't even getting into using things like Tree of Thought techniques to improve reasoning abilities and limit the search space for each portion of the problem to a reasonable size.
- hackinthebochs 3y agoExactly. The idea that an AGI will be contained in a virtual box is a non-starter. That ship has already sailed.
- calf 3y agoIf only Michael Crichton were alive, I bet he'd have something penetrating to say about all the naive hype as well as the naive anti-hype/rationalizations.