4 ms·
Did you criticize the turing test as being meaningless before it was easily passed by LLMs? if not i don't see how you can avoid updating on "this is getting mo
by snapcaster 2y ago
Did you criticize the turing test as being meaningless before it was easily passed by LLMs? if not i don't see how you can avoid updating on "this is getting more human" or at least "this is getting closer to intelligence" to avoid the human-bias
- jfengel 2y agoI never gave much thought to the Turing test one way or the other. It never struck me as especially informative. I've always been more interested in the non-verbal aspects of human intelligence. I believe that "true AGI", whatever that is, is likely to be able to mimic sentient but non-verbal species. I'd like to see an AGI do what a dog or cat does. LLMs are quite astonishing at mimicking something humans specifically do, the most "rational" parts of our brain. But they seem to jump past the basic, non-rational parts of the brain. And I don't think we'll see it as "true AGI" until it does that -- whatever that is. I'm reminded of the early AI researchers who taught AI to play chess because it's what smart people do, but it couldn't do any of the things dumb people do. I think the biggest question right now is whether our present techniques are a misleading local maximum, or if we're on the right slope and just need to keep climbing.
- snapcaster 2y agoWhat do you think a dog or cat does that can't be replicated by LLMs?
- jfengel 2y agoI don't know. I know that any particular thing I say could be met with an LLM that did that thing. But at the moment an LLM doesn't seem to be capable of coding itself up that way. Yet.
- snapcaster 2y agoI guess that was kind of my question when I thought about what you said. I could think of any things that a cat or dog do that _current_ LLMs can't do but nothing that seems fundamentally out of reach
- skydhash 2y agoAct on its own?
- snapcaster 2y agoWhat does it mean for something to "act on its own"? Every action taken is in some part due to what's happening in the environment right? I would argue that nothing "acts on it's own"
- charlescurt123 2y agocontinually learn with a fixed computational budget over massively extended task horizons.
- arminiusreturns 2y agoNo, but it could help me make such a thing.
- charlescurt123 2y agoPossibly, but as of now it's a completely unsolved problem and to my knowledge nobody has shown even a tiny model being able to perform it. Based on the top page today I may even be able to make the argument we can't even simulate the abilities of a fruit fly. The absolute frontier models can perform only a fraction of a fraction of what a typical work day looks like for a human. I calculated the chance that a frontier model today has about a 1^-29 chance of performing a single day of connected tasks based on GAIA benchmarks.
- AI_beffr 2y ago> I never gave much thought to the Turing test one way or the other then how are you qualified to even discuss this? shouldn't you have to have actually had a thought about something before you pretend to know something about it? i mean its pretty clear from your comment that you havent thought about AI for more than a year or two