4 ms·

If you don't believe ASI is possible, 7T is way too high. If you believe ASI is possible, 7T is wayyy too low, thus 7T is a compromise if you believe there's a

If you don't believe ASI is possible, 7T is way too high. If you believe ASI is possible, 7T is wayyy too low, thus 7T is a compromise if you believe there's a non-certain chance of ASI being possible

camjw 2y ago
Surely this “logic” applies to every positive amount of dollars. Why not 700T
- pixl97 2y ago
  So the question is, if you have AGI/ASI how much productive work could you get done with it? When looking at things like mechanization and the productivity increases from around 1880 to now, you took an economy from around 10 billion a year to 14 trillion. This involved mechanization and digitization. We live in a world that someone from 1880 really couldn't imagine. What I don't know how to answer (or at least search properly) is how much investment this took over that 150 year period. I'm going to assume it's vastly more than $7 trillion. If $7 trillion in investment and manufacturing allowed us to produce human level+ AI then the economic benefits of this would be in the tend to hundreds of trillions. Now, this isn't saying it would be good for me and you personally, but the capability to apply intelligence to problems and provide solutions would grow very rapidly and dramatically change the world we live in now.
  - SketchySeaBeast 2y ago
    > If $7 trillion in investment and manufacturing allowed us to produce human level+ AI then the economic benefits of this would be in the tend to hundreds of trillions. Sure, but right now that "if" is trying to do 7 trillion dollars of unsubstantiated heavy lifting. I might be able to start creating Iron Man-style arc reactors in a cave with a box of scraps and all I ask is 1 trillion, so you all should invest given how much money unlimited free energy is worth.
- atleastoptimal 2y ago
  The amount is just how quickly you scale up. Invest more money now and get ASi earlier.
cedws 2y ago
How do you even define ASI? How do you know it will run on silicon? If it will run on silicon, what kind of silicon? GPU? TPU? Binary? Ternary? Von-Neumann architecture? How can you even start to build chips for something completely imaginary?
- atleastoptimal 2y ago
  ASI is just AGI but scaled to the point of superhuman ability in all cognitive tasks. Surely it will run on the architectures used to build AGI before ASI takes control itself in the design and deployment.
  - Terr_ 2y ago
    > ASI is just AGI but scaled [...] Surely it will run on the architectures used to build AGI The words "just" and "surely" are doing so much heavy lifting here that I'm worried about labor-laws. :p If scaling up was "just" that easy and the next step would "surely" begin in the exact same architecture... Well, you've gotta ask why several billion general-intelligence units made from the finest possible nanotechnology haven't already merged into a super-intelligence. Or whether it happened, and we just didn't notice.

camjw 2y ago

Surely this “logic” applies to every positive amount of dollars. Why not 700T

pixl97 2y ago
So the question is, if you have AGI/ASI how much productive work could you get done with it? When looking at things like mechanization and the productivity increases from around 1880 to now, you took an economy from around 10 billion a year to 14 trillion. This involved mechanization and digitization. We live in a world that someone from 1880 really couldn't imagine. What I don't know how to answer (or at least search properly) is how much investment this took over that 150 year period. I'm going to assume it's vastly more than $7 trillion. If $7 trillion in investment and manufacturing allowed us to produce human level+ AI then the economic benefits of this would be in the tend to hundreds of trillions. Now, this isn't saying it would be good for me and you personally, but the capability to apply intelligence to problems and provide solutions would grow very rapidly and dramatically change the world we live in now.
- SketchySeaBeast 2y ago
  > If $7 trillion in investment and manufacturing allowed us to produce human level+ AI then the economic benefits of this would be in the tend to hundreds of trillions. Sure, but right now that "if" is trying to do 7 trillion dollars of unsubstantiated heavy lifting. I might be able to start creating Iron Man-style arc reactors in a cave with a box of scraps and all I ask is 1 trillion, so you all should invest given how much money unlimited free energy is worth.
atleastoptimal 2y ago
The amount is just how quickly you scale up. Invest more money now and get ASi earlier.

cedws 2y ago

How do you even define ASI? How do you know it will run on silicon? If it will run on silicon, what kind of silicon? GPU? TPU? Binary? Ternary? Von-Neumann architecture? How can you even start to build chips for something completely imaginary?

atleastoptimal 2y ago
ASI is just AGI but scaled to the point of superhuman ability in all cognitive tasks. Surely it will run on the architectures used to build AGI before ASI takes control itself in the design and deployment.
- Terr_ 2y ago
  > ASI is just AGI but scaled [...] Surely it will run on the architectures used to build AGI The words "just" and "surely" are doing so much heavy lifting here that I'm worried about labor-laws. :p If scaling up was "just" that easy and the next step would "surely" begin in the exact same architecture... Well, you've gotta ask why several billion general-intelligence units made from the finest possible nanotechnology haven't already merged into a super-intelligence. Or whether it happened, and we just didn't notice.