4 ms·

>I don’t see why the programmer wouldn’t just be the AI’s overseer, We need orders of magnitude fewer AI overseers than we need humans to do the work of the AI

>I don’t see why the programmer wouldn’t just be the AI’s overseer, We need orders of magnitude fewer AI overseers than we need humans to do the work of the AI. This will flip society on its head.

MattGaiser 2y ago
We need orders of magnitude fewer farm workers than we did a century ago. We don’t miss the jobs. Indeed, our society would collapse if we needed that many farm workers today. It will flip society on its head. For the better, as there is tons of additional productive capacity.
- hackinthebochs 2y ago
  The problem is the jobs you imagine people moving to won't materialize because AI will do those too. In the past, efficiency increases lead to the realization of new modes of transactions becoming economically viable. The people made obsolete moved to entirely new jobs because the tech was narrowly applicable. AGI is fully general, there is no space of jobs that humans could do but AGI cannot do. This is the end game for human labor. Society is not ready, and probably never will be.
  - tombert 2y ago
    What makes you think that we're actually close to AGI? I'm actually asking, because it seems like a buzzword that the media throws around a lot of handwaves the details away and just acts like it's inevitable. The latest thing I saw about it seemed to indicate that OpenAI was looking to build a dedicated nuclear power plant because AGI on current hardware might be possible with that much energy [1]. Even if they do crack AGI with that, it's not like its energy consumption will be justifiable. [1] https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/openai-nuclear-fusion-energy-ai-b2557064.html https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/openai-nuclear-fusion-ene...
    - hackinthebochs 2y ago
      This article[1] does a good job of laying out the argument from trends and arguing that taking the trends seriously suggests reaching AGI in a few years. Admittedly, my own argument in favor of near-term AGI is much less sophisticated but is also largely based on extrapolating trends and noting the leaps in capabilities that can come from singular architectural innovations. The GPT family has been amazingly productive, and they result from largely a single architectural innovation. They have glaring deficiencies, but their failures are fairly well understood and overcoming them are basically engineering problems at this point. Whereas 10 years ago no one had any idea how to get from the SOTA at the time to AGI, I see a clear path to it from here. [1] https://situational-awareness.ai/from-gpt-4-to-agi/ https://situational-awareness.ai/from-gpt-4-to-agi/
erik_seaberg 2y ago
If LLMs start thinking, we should expect to see entire new industries that didn't used to exist because they required too much menial work. But that's a big "if." They seem to be parroting stuff without knowing or caring what's true.
- hackinthebochs 2y ago
  > we should expect to see entire new industries that didn't used to exist Why would anyone need a human here when the AGI could do that too?

MattGaiser 2y ago

We need orders of magnitude fewer farm workers than we did a century ago. We don’t miss the jobs. Indeed, our society would collapse if we needed that many farm workers today. It will flip society on its head. For the better, as there is tons of additional productive capacity.

hackinthebochs 2y ago
The problem is the jobs you imagine people moving to won't materialize because AI will do those too. In the past, efficiency increases lead to the realization of new modes of transactions becoming economically viable. The people made obsolete moved to entirely new jobs because the tech was narrowly applicable. AGI is fully general, there is no space of jobs that humans could do but AGI cannot do. This is the end game for human labor. Society is not ready, and probably never will be.
- tombert 2y ago
  What makes you think that we're actually close to AGI? I'm actually asking, because it seems like a buzzword that the media throws around a lot of handwaves the details away and just acts like it's inevitable. The latest thing I saw about it seemed to indicate that OpenAI was looking to build a dedicated nuclear power plant because AGI on current hardware might be possible with that much energy [1]. Even if they do crack AGI with that, it's not like its energy consumption will be justifiable. [1] https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/openai-nuclear-fusion-energy-ai-b2557064.html https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/openai-nuclear-fusion-ene...
  - hackinthebochs 2y ago
    This article[1] does a good job of laying out the argument from trends and arguing that taking the trends seriously suggests reaching AGI in a few years. Admittedly, my own argument in favor of near-term AGI is much less sophisticated but is also largely based on extrapolating trends and noting the leaps in capabilities that can come from singular architectural innovations. The GPT family has been amazingly productive, and they result from largely a single architectural innovation. They have glaring deficiencies, but their failures are fairly well understood and overcoming them are basically engineering problems at this point. Whereas 10 years ago no one had any idea how to get from the SOTA at the time to AGI, I see a clear path to it from here. [1] https://situational-awareness.ai/from-gpt-4-to-agi/ https://situational-awareness.ai/from-gpt-4-to-agi/

erik_seaberg 2y ago

If LLMs start thinking, we should expect to see entire new industries that didn't used to exist because they required too much menial work. But that's a big "if." They seem to be parroting stuff without knowing or caring what's true.

hackinthebochs 2y ago
> we should expect to see entire new industries that didn't used to exist Why would anyone need a human here when the AGI could do that too?