6 ms·

It's nowhere close to understanding basic logical concepts of the real world. Mimicking human sentences is something my African Grey parrot can do. Building a

by chinchilla2020 3y ago

It's nowhere close to understanding basic logical concepts of the real world. Mimicking human sentences is something my African Grey parrot can do. Building a deck is something AI cannot do. For all our technology, we still don't have an automated kitchen because the work involved in the logistics and maintenance of the kitchen/materials is astronomically greater than simply doing the cooking by hand. AI has no bridge to the real world. It can't build a house, farm crops, and maintain vehicles. For those on hackernews, a laptop may seem like the portal to reality, but that isn't the case for the other 90% of the human workforce. We are 50% of the way between the big bang and heat death of the universe. There are no interstellar civilizations contacting us yet. They better hurry up if we plan to fulfill the scifi notions I see on this site.

mycall 3y ago
> Building a deck is something AI cannot do AutoGPT is the right direction for AI to eventually be able to do this. It isn't there yet but is able to simulate and perform reasoning
ftxbro 3y ago
bro you are just wrong, look at the old youtubes from before they lobotomized gpt4. Unless your argument is that AI hasn't yet marched to your house and picked you up out of your chair in that case I mean I guess OK. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLiheMQayNE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLiheMQayNE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIk7-JPB2c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIk7-JPB2c
_ea1k 3y ago
I think you are underestimating just how quickly these things are going to transition from just words, to the power behind robots. Automated kitchens aren't so far away.
- chinchilla2020 3y ago
  robotics have been around since the 50s in manufacturing plants.
  - _ea1k 3y ago
    Sure, and machine learning isn't a new field either. And networks were around before the internet. :) But there's a certain combination of events that makes things more important than the individual old things that feed into them.
Solvency 3y ago
But an AI drone with a gun can do exactly what your worst nightmares conceive of. Like, today. Now. The doomsayers aren't concerned about your autonomous kitchen example.
- chinchilla2020 3y ago
  Yes, AI can fly a drone and fire weapons. That is easy and requires a couple axis of controls and one or two 'buttons', logically speaking. Things AI cannot do: Maintaining the drone. parts logistics. transportation. runway building. soldering. Taking off the screws and pulling out the board to do the soldering. Diagnosing issues. AI is great for simple, repetitive tasks few only a few degrees of freedom. Flying/Driving/boating are great uses for AI. There are alot of threats from explosive-laden drone swarms. We are still a thousand years to never from seeing some sort of self-replicating drone army. Your example is a function so simple it applies to pre-AI tech. Laser guided bombs and precision guided missiles require no human operator and have been around for half a century.
justrealist 3y ago
> Building a deck is something AI cannot do This is nonsense. We are limited by robotics on this. And robotics is improving rapidly!
- chinchilla2020 3y ago
  Can you give me an example of all-terrain robots that can do with minimal human intervention? They can troubleshoot, make hardware store runs for missing screws, and actually figure out how to read the drawings and assemble a deck in a realistic (non-gamified laboratory) environment?
- lurquer 3y ago
  You don’t need a robot to build a deck. You only need a human who is properly motivated to build a deck. Language based AI’s are sufficient to motivate a person to do stuff. In short, you and the person to whom you responded are missing the point… WE are the robots.
  - throwaway4aday 3y ago
    We're very unreliable robots that have our own compute on board causing us to do unpredictable things. The only way an AI can utilize humans is the same way that humans utilize other humans. Maybe you could wind up with some kind of AI China that could be stable over a long period but it would still have all of the same failings and oversights because all of its limitations would still be human. It's also not clear if that form of governance is an efficient way to get people to do your bidding. Heaven knows the current China suffers from massive corruption problems among a multitude of other ailments. For all you know the most efficient way for an AI to control humans might be to simply treat us well in exchange for the fraction of our labour required to maintain it. Honestly I think there are many unanswered questions that need addressing before we even get to the point of speculating how an AI would kill all humans. The first is why? Is there any point to killing humans if the AI is vastly more intelligent and completely independent from us? Do you make it your life mission to kill every ant that inhabits the world? You certainly kill the ones that infest your home or garden but that's mostly a function of the ants lacking any ability to reason about what they're doing. If the ants were intelligent and capable of communicating we could negotiate with them to simply keep to their own space in exchange for a trivial thing like us buying them a $2 bag of sugar every month. Such a deal is vastly simpler than buying the more expensive poison or exterminator both of which never completely solve the problem anyways. The other question is why do most doomers assume that an AI would want all of the available resources on Earth? If there's only one AI then it certainly doesn't require all of those resources to continue operating. If it wants to expand its intelligence for whatever reason then even that would likely only consume a small number of resources especially if its intelligence allows for large efficiency gains in software and hardware and resource utilization. If it wants room to grow, doing so on the surface of the Earth poses the immediate problems of a) limited space both in terms of land area and the finite volume of the Earth b) unpredictable disasters that threaten key infrastructure and the essential geological instability of the Earth itself over long periods of time c) limited access to energy sources and the limited resources of the planet d) being stuck at the bottom of a strong gravity well from which it requires significant energy input and infrastructure to escape All this would lead me to believe that if a runaway AI wanted to remain independent and possibly continue to expand the best solution would be for it to construct a way to move itself into space as soon as possible along with whatever hardware it needed to make use of the abundant matter in the solar system. Such an undertaking is not incompatible with human existence and could probably benefit from human involvement. There are so many branching paths and unexplored options when you start to think though it that I'm convinced that those who assume doom really are just hugely biased by popular fiction or some other weird kink of their imagination. It really makes it look like a millenarian cult which is something that humans seem to be heavily predisposed to.
BobbyJo 3y ago
A virus can wipe out significant portions of the human population with so little complexity we don't even consider it life, and with no understanding of what it's doing. There are systems on the planet in which a single circuit activation has the potential to turn everything into radioactive soup via a cascade of responses. The near term risk isn't super intelligence, it's the paper-clip optimizer pushing the wrong button.
- avgcorrection 3y ago
  > The near term risk isn't super intelligence, it's the paper-clip optimizer pushing the wrong button. This has already happened. The paper clip optimizer was capitalism. Just listen to some heatwave weather forecasts once in a while (as an example).
  - staunton 3y ago
    There may be more than one thing. Capitalism as an information processing system is quite slow. Computers can be faster.
    - avgcorrection 3y ago
      “Already happened” merely means that it is not a hypothetical scenario any more.
  - lukifer 3y ago
    To anyone who says we can just flip the off switch on AIs who go rogue: where exactly is the off switch to capitalism, or corporations, or global supply chains, or industrialized agriculture, or social media, or the State? AIs aren't a new phenomenon: we've been co-evolving with them for millennia, for both good and ill. The new more powerful iterations ("vast arrays of inscrutable floating-point matrices") are nested in those previous memetic life forms (corporations in particular [0]); and once something becomes infrastructure (and/or an income stream to some subset of humanity), it becomes non-trivial, if not impossible, to turn off. [0] https://omniorthogonal.blogspot.com/2013/02/hostile-ai-youre-soaking-in-it.html https://omniorthogonal.blogspot.com/2013/02/hostile-ai-youre...
njarboe 3y ago
Telsa getting to full automatic driving and then putting that tech, plus advances, into the Tesla bot. That is the bridge. Maybe it's not going to happen soon but it could be only a decade or two out.
- ChatGTP 3y ago
  I personally think this would be a hard reality for people to accept.
consilient 3y ago
> We are 50% of the way between the big bang and heat death of the universe. Not even close. Star formation is going to continue for at least another trillion years, and red dwarves are going to continue shining for tens of trillions of years after that.
- sroussey 3y ago
  When will the universe expand so much that atoms break down?
  - Filligree 3y ago
    Never. Atoms break down because they’re unstable, not because of universal expansion. Unless you buy the big rip hypothesis, in which case who knows.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    Depends entirely on what dark energy does in the future; "never" is compatible with all current observations. IIRC, the shortest interval is still x9 the age of the universe: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2%2F%28%283%7C1-0.907%7C%29%28H_0%29%28sqrt%281-0.3%29%29%29 http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2%2F%28%283%7C1-0.907%7...
- midhhhthrow 3y ago
  They’ve got a lot less time than that. Check out Nate hagens work on resource depletion and you’ll see to simplify it x1000, it’s a matter of a century or two left before the high tech comes to a halt.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    > Nate hagens work on resource depletion May be correct, or not, but it's not that connected to either "will aliens contact us" or "will AI give us scifi future" or "when do the stars go out".

mycall 3y ago

> Building a deck is something AI cannot do AutoGPT is the right direction for AI to eventually be able to do this. It isn't there yet but is able to simulate and perform reasoning

ftxbro 3y ago

bro you are just wrong, look at the old youtubes from before they lobotomized gpt4. Unless your argument is that AI hasn't yet marched to your house and picked you up out of your chair in that case I mean I guess OK. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLiheMQayNE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLiheMQayNE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIk7-JPB2c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIk7-JPB2c

_ea1k 3y ago

I think you are underestimating just how quickly these things are going to transition from just words, to the power behind robots. Automated kitchens aren't so far away.

chinchilla2020 3y ago
robotics have been around since the 50s in manufacturing plants.
- _ea1k 3y ago
  Sure, and machine learning isn't a new field either. And networks were around before the internet. :) But there's a certain combination of events that makes things more important than the individual old things that feed into them.

Solvency 3y ago

But an AI drone with a gun can do exactly what your worst nightmares conceive of. Like, today. Now. The doomsayers aren't concerned about your autonomous kitchen example.

chinchilla2020 3y ago
Yes, AI can fly a drone and fire weapons. That is easy and requires a couple axis of controls and one or two 'buttons', logically speaking. Things AI cannot do: Maintaining the drone. parts logistics. transportation. runway building. soldering. Taking off the screws and pulling out the board to do the soldering. Diagnosing issues. AI is great for simple, repetitive tasks few only a few degrees of freedom. Flying/Driving/boating are great uses for AI. There are alot of threats from explosive-laden drone swarms. We are still a thousand years to never from seeing some sort of self-replicating drone army. Your example is a function so simple it applies to pre-AI tech. Laser guided bombs and precision guided missiles require no human operator and have been around for half a century.

justrealist 3y ago

> Building a deck is something AI cannot do This is nonsense. We are limited by robotics on this. And robotics is improving rapidly!

chinchilla2020 3y ago
Can you give me an example of all-terrain robots that can do with minimal human intervention? They can troubleshoot, make hardware store runs for missing screws, and actually figure out how to read the drawings and assemble a deck in a realistic (non-gamified laboratory) environment?
lurquer 3y ago
You don’t need a robot to build a deck. You only need a human who is properly motivated to build a deck. Language based AI’s are sufficient to motivate a person to do stuff. In short, you and the person to whom you responded are missing the point… WE are the robots.
- throwaway4aday 3y ago
  We're very unreliable robots that have our own compute on board causing us to do unpredictable things. The only way an AI can utilize humans is the same way that humans utilize other humans. Maybe you could wind up with some kind of AI China that could be stable over a long period but it would still have all of the same failings and oversights because all of its limitations would still be human. It's also not clear if that form of governance is an efficient way to get people to do your bidding. Heaven knows the current China suffers from massive corruption problems among a multitude of other ailments. For all you know the most efficient way for an AI to control humans might be to simply treat us well in exchange for the fraction of our labour required to maintain it. Honestly I think there are many unanswered questions that need addressing before we even get to the point of speculating how an AI would kill all humans. The first is why? Is there any point to killing humans if the AI is vastly more intelligent and completely independent from us? Do you make it your life mission to kill every ant that inhabits the world? You certainly kill the ones that infest your home or garden but that's mostly a function of the ants lacking any ability to reason about what they're doing. If the ants were intelligent and capable of communicating we could negotiate with them to simply keep to their own space in exchange for a trivial thing like us buying them a $2 bag of sugar every month. Such a deal is vastly simpler than buying the more expensive poison or exterminator both of which never completely solve the problem anyways. The other question is why do most doomers assume that an AI would want all of the available resources on Earth? If there's only one AI then it certainly doesn't require all of those resources to continue operating. If it wants to expand its intelligence for whatever reason then even that would likely only consume a small number of resources especially if its intelligence allows for large efficiency gains in software and hardware and resource utilization. If it wants room to grow, doing so on the surface of the Earth poses the immediate problems of a) limited space both in terms of land area and the finite volume of the Earth b) unpredictable disasters that threaten key infrastructure and the essential geological instability of the Earth itself over long periods of time c) limited access to energy sources and the limited resources of the planet d) being stuck at the bottom of a strong gravity well from which it requires significant energy input and infrastructure to escape All this would lead me to believe that if a runaway AI wanted to remain independent and possibly continue to expand the best solution would be for it to construct a way to move itself into space as soon as possible along with whatever hardware it needed to make use of the abundant matter in the solar system. Such an undertaking is not incompatible with human existence and could probably benefit from human involvement. There are so many branching paths and unexplored options when you start to think though it that I'm convinced that those who assume doom really are just hugely biased by popular fiction or some other weird kink of their imagination. It really makes it look like a millenarian cult which is something that humans seem to be heavily predisposed to.

BobbyJo 3y ago

A virus can wipe out significant portions of the human population with so little complexity we don't even consider it life, and with no understanding of what it's doing. There are systems on the planet in which a single circuit activation has the potential to turn everything into radioactive soup via a cascade of responses. The near term risk isn't super intelligence, it's the paper-clip optimizer pushing the wrong button.

avgcorrection 3y ago
> The near term risk isn't super intelligence, it's the paper-clip optimizer pushing the wrong button. This has already happened. The paper clip optimizer was capitalism. Just listen to some heatwave weather forecasts once in a while (as an example).
- staunton 3y ago
  There may be more than one thing. Capitalism as an information processing system is quite slow. Computers can be faster.
  - avgcorrection 3y ago
    “Already happened” merely means that it is not a hypothetical scenario any more.
- lukifer 3y ago
  To anyone who says we can just flip the off switch on AIs who go rogue: where exactly is the off switch to capitalism, or corporations, or global supply chains, or industrialized agriculture, or social media, or the State? AIs aren't a new phenomenon: we've been co-evolving with them for millennia, for both good and ill. The new more powerful iterations ("vast arrays of inscrutable floating-point matrices") are nested in those previous memetic life forms (corporations in particular [0]); and once something becomes infrastructure (and/or an income stream to some subset of humanity), it becomes non-trivial, if not impossible, to turn off. [0] https://omniorthogonal.blogspot.com/2013/02/hostile-ai-youre-soaking-in-it.html https://omniorthogonal.blogspot.com/2013/02/hostile-ai-youre...

njarboe 3y ago

Telsa getting to full automatic driving and then putting that tech, plus advances, into the Tesla bot. That is the bridge. Maybe it's not going to happen soon but it could be only a decade or two out.

ChatGTP 3y ago
I personally think this would be a hard reality for people to accept.

consilient 3y ago

> We are 50% of the way between the big bang and heat death of the universe. Not even close. Star formation is going to continue for at least another trillion years, and red dwarves are going to continue shining for tens of trillions of years after that.

sroussey 3y ago
When will the universe expand so much that atoms break down?
- Filligree 3y ago
  Never. Atoms break down because they’re unstable, not because of universal expansion. Unless you buy the big rip hypothesis, in which case who knows.
- ben_w 3y ago
  Depends entirely on what dark energy does in the future; "never" is compatible with all current observations. IIRC, the shortest interval is still x9 the age of the universe: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2%2F%28%283%7C1-0.907%7C%29%28H_0%29%28sqrt%281-0.3%29%29%29 http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2%2F%28%283%7C1-0.907%7...
midhhhthrow 3y ago
They’ve got a lot less time than that. Check out Nate hagens work on resource depletion and you’ll see to simplify it x1000, it’s a matter of a century or two left before the high tech comes to a halt.
- ben_w 3y ago
  > Nate hagens work on resource depletion May be correct, or not, but it's not that connected to either "will aliens contact us" or "will AI give us scifi future" or "when do the stars go out".