3 ms·
I just recently read "How the Mind Works" by Steven Pinker. It's quite old at this point (originally 1997, though updated in 2009), and one thing he argues quit
by hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
I just recently read "How the Mind Works" by Steven Pinker. It's quite old at this point (originally 1997, though updated in 2009), and one thing he argues quite convincingly (and which has been pretty much born out in decades of research) is that the brain essentially has "modules", e.g. a module for vision, a module for language, a module for physical object interaction. These modules obviously overlap (e.g. language touches on lots of different domains), but they do have genetically independent structures.
I was thinking about this when I read the following section from the article, and I very much agree with LeCun. We're amazed by LLMs but that's just one module (and not even necessarily at the level of human language "understanding"). I agree there will be no "scale up" in LLMs to approach human-level intelligence, and that other areas will need to be investigated and developed.
> “The systems are intelligent in the relatively narrow domain where they’ve been trained. They are fluent with language and that fools us into thinking that they are intelligent, but they are not that intelligent,” explains LeCun. “It’s not as if we’re going to be able to scale them up and train them with more data, with bigger computers, and reach human intelligence. This is not going to happen. What’s going to happen is that we’re going to have to discover new technology, new architectures of those systems,” the scientist clarifies.
> LeCun explains that there is a need to develop new forms of AI systems “that would allow those systems to, first of all, understand the physical world, which they can’t do at the moment. Remember, which they can’t do at the moment. Reason and plan, which they can’t do at the moment either.”
> “So once we figure out how to build machines so they can understand the world — remember, plan and reason — then we’ll have a path towards human-level intelligence,” continues LeCun, who was born in France. In more than one debate and speech at Davos, experts discussed the paradox of Europe having very significant human capital in this sector, but no leading companies on a global scale.
- bgnn 3y agoPinker is full of shit tbh. There is not a unified model for human brain. What I mean is, there are people claiming it's modular and there are people claiming it is a whole. We don't even know the reasons behind very specific neural malfunctions like tinnitus which I suffer from and follow the research closely. There are as many theories as researchers in a given specific field.
- rain_iwakura 3y agoYeah this pretty much sums it up: https://medium.com/the-spike/evolution-doesnt-give-a-damn-what-you-think-a-brain-region-is-called-1c9c5f80ab89 https://medium.com/the-spike/evolution-doesnt-give-a-damn-wh... Also, Pinker isn't a scientist of any sort, he's an accredited and institutionalized evangelist. You guys wouldn't take opinions of someone going to conferences and trying to convert you to use Go lang instead of something else as seriously as those of Guido Rossum would you? His whole thesis requires an idea of linear progress which is highly contested, and the metrics of happiness he uses also can be easily "Goodhart's Law"ed by him to show whatever he thinks is happening. I'm not even getting to his Epstein stuff, which some might cry foul about, but I grew up around regular people and not in Silicon Valley, so a liar and a cheat in one field is probably a liar and a cheat in another to me, sorry.