4 ms·

If I had to place bets on which lab will invent agi I'd bet against "invent AGI" being a coherent or agreed upon thing, and I'd also bet against the "wake-up"

• pixl97 3y ago
  Hell,LLMs can and do output strings of "I'm AGI", so in some sense we're long past that. The problem is as humans we've never defined what it means for a system to be AGI.
  • jondwillis 3y ago
    My back of a napkin definition is that AGI, given the same information and tools as an IQ 100 human, is able to do all of the same tasks that you could ask a human to do, at the same quality level, as well as recall the experience some time later, like a human would likely be able to do.
    • pixl97 3y ago
      The particular issue here is that is subjective as any other subjective definition. 100 IQ is subjective and a moving target. 100 IQ doesn't even mean you can survive and navigate in the real world. Even worse is all humans cannot do all tasks other humans can do and we'd consider them intelligent. Furthermore this "must behave like a human" blindness represents both a danger, and a way to miss intelligence capabilities leaving them unused/under capitalized. Humans behave like humans because we have human bodies with particular sets of strengths and weaknesses. Other 'intelligent' actors with different embodiment will necessarily behave differently. Couple that with humans have become far more intelligent and stronger by using tools, that the ability to 'universally' interface with external tooling, at least in my subjective opinion is what will be the defining factor of higher intelligences.
    • hackernewds 3y ago
      Could argue ChatGPT can already do a lot of this
• cma 3y ago
  Didn't Schmidhuber's lab predate all of those in their inventions except ReLU (which I've heard is now out of favor as compute outpaces memory bandwidth and other activation functions have better properties).
  • chubot 3y ago
    Yeah I should have mentioned him too as evidence of the point!