4 ms·

As always, define "AGI". Define it well enough that we'll know whether we reach it or not. If you can't define it, Google's AI chief can claim he was right, b

As always, define "AGI". Define it well enough that we'll know whether we reach it or not. If you can't define it, Google's AI chief can claim he was right, but that will be like, just his opinion, man.

pw6hv 3y ago
If he said there's 50% chances, then he'll be right in any case.
ryanklee 3y ago
Nobody is going to be debating definitions when it's here. If there's a question, then the answer is no.
- famouswaffles 3y ago
  Lol that's not true at all. Many people have definitions of AGI that are partially or wholly mutually conflicting.
  - ryanklee 3y ago
    My point is that actual AGI will make such debates totally irrelevant.
    - famouswaffles 3y ago
      No it won't. What is "Actual AGI" and why is it not simply a machine that is generally intelligent ?
      - ryanklee 3y ago
        I think you might not be following my point. Actual AGI will be so enormously singular and distinct from anything we've ever encountered that only an idiot would look at it and say, "But hmmm, maybe this might not be it." The very fact of continued debates over definitions to act as criteria is all the signal we need to know that we aren't there yet.
        famouswaffles 3y ago
        Why would it be "so enormously singular and distinct from anything we've ever encountered" ? What does being an Artificial General Intelligence have anything to do with any of that ? This is the point I'm making. You're hiding behind vague musings. ENIAC as the first general purpose computer was a declaration made years after the fact. Why do you think it's going to be any different here ?
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - AnimalMuppet 3y ago
    And yet, in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38113190 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38113190, you said that AGI is "a bar we have passed". That statement assumes that we have a clear enough definition that you can tell whether we have passed it. But here you say that many people have conflicting definitions, that is, that there's not a clear agreed-upon definition. I don't think you can have it both ways.
    - famouswaffles 3y ago
      Yes people have conflicting definitions of the specific term. But Artificial and Generally Intelligent is a bar that's been passed. Take a look at all those definitions i brought up and tell me which ones have anything to do with only being generally intelligent ?
famouswaffles 3y ago
Artificial and Generally Intelligent. That's what it's supposed to mean. What it used to mean. A bar we have passed. Now there's all sorts of weird offshoots where passing the bar is tantamount to Super Intelligence. "For some, it might mean any that is needs to do everything a normal human can. For some, non-biological life axiomatically cannot become AGI. For some, it must be "conscious" and "sentient". For some, it might require literal omniscience and omnipotence and accepting anything as AGI means, to them, that they are being told to worship it as a God. For some, it might mean something more like an AI that is more competent than the most competent human at literally every task. For some, acknowledging it means that we must acknowledge it has person-like rights. For some it cannot be AGI if it lies. For some it cannot be AGI if it makes any mistake. For some it cannot be AGI until it has more power than humans. These are several definitions and implications that are partially or wholly mutually conflicting but I have seen different people say that AGI is each different one of those." He should define his version but it obviously doesn't matter what he defines it as since humans are in the business of making up new posts on the fly.
- lm28469 3y ago
  > Artificial and Generally Intelligent. That's what it's supposed to mean. What it used to mean. A bar we have passed. Since when? You can ask 10 people and get 10 different definitions
  - famouswaffles 3y ago
    That was the idea when the term was coined. Obviously now it just means all sorts of things.
    - lm28469 3y ago
      But what's "general" ? Does it exist physically ? Can it play tennis ? Can it smell a flower ? Can it assemble an ikea shelf ? Can it make and serve me a tea ? Some people, even on HN, say chatgpt already is AGI for example...
i67vw3 3y ago
A 'consciousness' tries to reproduce (humans, animals, bacteria etc) to preserve itself. The day AI decides to kill not a human but humanity itself will be the day AGI is achieved. Until then 'AI' is vapourware, turing test and other such tests are meaningless.
tutfbhuf 3y ago
If we achieve AGI, it will be such a significant event that everyone in tech and most not in tech will know about it, regardless of any definition.

pw6hv 3y ago

If he said there's 50% chances, then he'll be right in any case.

ryanklee 3y ago

Nobody is going to be debating definitions when it's here. If there's a question, then the answer is no.

famouswaffles 3y ago
Lol that's not true at all. Many people have definitions of AGI that are partially or wholly mutually conflicting.
- ryanklee 3y ago
  My point is that actual AGI will make such debates totally irrelevant.
  - famouswaffles 3y ago
    No it won't. What is "Actual AGI" and why is it not simply a machine that is generally intelligent ?
    - ryanklee 3y ago
      I think you might not be following my point. Actual AGI will be so enormously singular and distinct from anything we've ever encountered that only an idiot would look at it and say, "But hmmm, maybe this might not be it." The very fact of continued debates over definitions to act as criteria is all the signal we need to know that we aren't there yet.
      - famouswaffles 3y ago
        Why would it be "so enormously singular and distinct from anything we've ever encountered" ? What does being an Artificial General Intelligence have anything to do with any of that ? This is the point I'm making. You're hiding behind vague musings. ENIAC as the first general purpose computer was a declaration made years after the fact. Why do you think it's going to be any different here ?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- AnimalMuppet 3y ago
  And yet, in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38113190 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38113190, you said that AGI is "a bar we have passed". That statement assumes that we have a clear enough definition that you can tell whether we have passed it. But here you say that many people have conflicting definitions, that is, that there's not a clear agreed-upon definition. I don't think you can have it both ways.
  - famouswaffles 3y ago
    Yes people have conflicting definitions of the specific term. But Artificial and Generally Intelligent is a bar that's been passed. Take a look at all those definitions i brought up and tell me which ones have anything to do with only being generally intelligent ?

famouswaffles 3y ago

Artificial and Generally Intelligent. That's what it's supposed to mean. What it used to mean. A bar we have passed. Now there's all sorts of weird offshoots where passing the bar is tantamount to Super Intelligence. "For some, it might mean any that is needs to do everything a normal human can. For some, non-biological life axiomatically cannot become AGI. For some, it must be "conscious" and "sentient". For some, it might require literal omniscience and omnipotence and accepting anything as AGI means, to them, that they are being told to worship it as a God. For some, it might mean something more like an AI that is more competent than the most competent human at literally every task. For some, acknowledging it means that we must acknowledge it has person-like rights. For some it cannot be AGI if it lies. For some it cannot be AGI if it makes any mistake. For some it cannot be AGI until it has more power than humans. These are several definitions and implications that are partially or wholly mutually conflicting but I have seen different people say that AGI is each different one of those." He should define his version but it obviously doesn't matter what he defines it as since humans are in the business of making up new posts on the fly.

lm28469 3y ago
> Artificial and Generally Intelligent. That's what it's supposed to mean. What it used to mean. A bar we have passed. Since when? You can ask 10 people and get 10 different definitions
- famouswaffles 3y ago
  That was the idea when the term was coined. Obviously now it just means all sorts of things.
  - lm28469 3y ago
    But what's "general" ? Does it exist physically ? Can it play tennis ? Can it smell a flower ? Can it assemble an ikea shelf ? Can it make and serve me a tea ? Some people, even on HN, say chatgpt already is AGI for example...

i67vw3 3y ago

A 'consciousness' tries to reproduce (humans, animals, bacteria etc) to preserve itself. The day AI decides to kill not a human but humanity itself will be the day AGI is achieved. Until then 'AI' is vapourware, turing test and other such tests are meaningless.

tutfbhuf 3y ago

If we achieve AGI, it will be such a significant event that everyone in tech and most not in tech will know about it, regardless of any definition.