3 ms·

This article is almost entirely unsourced, citing two anonymous people who are “familiar” with a supposed letter that Reuters has not seen. This does not qualif

This article is almost entirely unsourced, citing two anonymous people who are “familiar” with a supposed letter that Reuters has not seen. This does not qualify as news. It doesn’t even rise to the level of informed speculation!

dmix 3y ago
We've also already seen one random Google AI 'safety' employee trying to tell the media that AGI is here because Google built a chatbot that sounded convincing, which obviously turned out to be bullshit/hysterical. Asking who said these things is as important as asking what they think is possible.
- mjr00 3y ago
  > We've also already seen one random Google AI 'safety' employee trying to tell the media that AGI is here because Google built a chatbot that sounded convincing, which obviously turned out to be bullshit/hysterical. It's funny because the ELIZA effect[0] has been known for decades, and I'd assume any AI researcher is fully aware of it. But so many people are caught up in the hype and think it doesn't apply this time around. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA_effect
- riku_iki 3y ago
  > chatbot that sounded convincing, which obviously turned out to be bullshit/hysterical. that chatbot could be smart until lobotomized by fairness and safety finetuning
devindotcom 3y ago
Remember, the people are only anonymous to you. Reuters knows who they are. Familiar with means the sources read it but did not provide it or quote from it. FTA - the letter was sent from researchers to the board. The researchers declined to comment. Who does that leave?
- adriand 3y ago
  It strongly reminds me of the UFO stories that were all the rage a few months ago, and that military guy who testified before Congress about what he had heard from other people. Did any of that pan out? It seems not.
  - Jugglerofworlds 3y ago
    I follow the UFO community, that stuff is still going on. The military man, David Grusch was recently on the Joe Rogan podcast where he talked about steps moving forward. The next big thing coming down the pipeline is ensuring that "The UAP Disclosure Act of 2023" proposed by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer passes the house. Yes this is the real name of the act, and has already passed through the Senate as part of the NDAA. The opposition in the House is coming from members from districts with entrenched military/military contracting interests.
    - alienicecream 3y ago
      It's no fun if you don't get strung along for a few years.
- 0xDEF 3y ago
  >Remember, the people are only anonymous to you. Reuters knows who they are. A group of Russian trolls/comedians have been able to cheat Western politicians and journalists into talking with them using deep faked webcam feeds and edited documents. Most still remember the amount of ridiculous "anonymous source" bullshit stories that were pushed during the Trump years. Honestly at this point I just assume all "anonymous sources" and the journalists who quote them are lying.
evantbyrne 3y ago
It's just way too convenient from a marketing standpoint for me to take seriously at face value. It would be pretty easy to get someone to "leak" that they developed "AGI" to the media right now in the middle of the leadership shakeup frenzy. Not to mention that none of the LLMs I've used appear anywhere close to what I would consider AGI. Expect an incremental update.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

dmix 3y ago

We've also already seen one random Google AI 'safety' employee trying to tell the media that AGI is here because Google built a chatbot that sounded convincing, which obviously turned out to be bullshit/hysterical. Asking who said these things is as important as asking what they think is possible.

mjr00 3y ago
> We've also already seen one random Google AI 'safety' employee trying to tell the media that AGI is here because Google built a chatbot that sounded convincing, which obviously turned out to be bullshit/hysterical. It's funny because the ELIZA effect[0] has been known for decades, and I'd assume any AI researcher is fully aware of it. But so many people are caught up in the hype and think it doesn't apply this time around. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA_effect
riku_iki 3y ago
> chatbot that sounded convincing, which obviously turned out to be bullshit/hysterical. that chatbot could be smart until lobotomized by fairness and safety finetuning

devindotcom 3y ago

Remember, the people are only anonymous to you. Reuters knows who they are. Familiar with means the sources read it but did not provide it or quote from it. FTA - the letter was sent from researchers to the board. The researchers declined to comment. Who does that leave?

adriand 3y ago
It strongly reminds me of the UFO stories that were all the rage a few months ago, and that military guy who testified before Congress about what he had heard from other people. Did any of that pan out? It seems not.
- Jugglerofworlds 3y ago
  I follow the UFO community, that stuff is still going on. The military man, David Grusch was recently on the Joe Rogan podcast where he talked about steps moving forward. The next big thing coming down the pipeline is ensuring that "The UAP Disclosure Act of 2023" proposed by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer passes the house. Yes this is the real name of the act, and has already passed through the Senate as part of the NDAA. The opposition in the House is coming from members from districts with entrenched military/military contracting interests.
  - alienicecream 3y ago
    It's no fun if you don't get strung along for a few years.
0xDEF 3y ago
>Remember, the people are only anonymous to you. Reuters knows who they are. A group of Russian trolls/comedians have been able to cheat Western politicians and journalists into talking with them using deep faked webcam feeds and edited documents. Most still remember the amount of ridiculous "anonymous source" bullshit stories that were pushed during the Trump years. Honestly at this point I just assume all "anonymous sources" and the journalists who quote them are lying.

evantbyrne 3y ago

It's just way too convenient from a marketing standpoint for me to take seriously at face value. It would be pretty easy to get someone to "leak" that they developed "AGI" to the media right now in the middle of the leadership shakeup frenzy. Not to mention that none of the LLMs I've used appear anywhere close to what I would consider AGI. Expect an incremental update.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]