4 ms·

Ask HN: If a private company like OpenAI acheives AGI

5 points by crazymoka 2y ago

Do you really think they would make it public or use it to their advantage for as long as possible?

jqpabc123 2y ago
Personally, I don't think the question is terribly relevant because I see no reason to believe AGI is possible with a binary logic playback device (aka a computer as we know it) and certainly not using relatively simple, statistical algorithms and lots of storage. Expecting AGI to just spring forth from a box of inert electrical silicon-based switches is like expecting a hammer to start driving nails on it's own. It's a modern form of alchemy --- expecting a fantastical result from trial and error with only limited understanding of the processes required.
- PaulHoule 2y ago
  E.g. do you have an argument better than Penrose's "I can only do math because I'm a thetan?"
  - jqpabc123 2y ago
    Do you have an argument better than "Miracles do happen"?
    - PaulHoule 2y ago
      Define a miracle. That's the problem with intelligence. One day chess was considered a form of intelligence, that got solved by alpha-beta search and there was no longer a miracle. Or is it that visual recognition models since YoLo are a miracle in the sense of practical image recognition?
adastra22 2y ago
You’re going to have to define what you mean, because ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence with general problem solving capabilities. So, yes OpenAI would make AGI available. They already did.
- jqpabc123 2y ago
  Q: How many letters are in the word "intelligence"? A: The word "intelligence" contains 11 letters: i-n-t-e-l-l-i-g-e-n-c-e. Wrong! The correct answer is 12. This is definitely not AGI! It is a crude statistical attempt that some people confuse with AGI.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - adastra22 2y ago
    Again, you need to define AGI. According to the classical definition of the term by the people who coined it, the example you gave proves that it is AGI. You were able to specify a problem using a fully generic interface (chat) that the AI was not specifically trained on, and it got an answer close to the right answer. The process it used to generate that answer is general intelligence.
    - jqpabc123 2y ago
      Semantics aside, it is definitely lacking and leaves much to be desired in terms of "intelligence". Either it didn't understand the question or it can't count --- take your pick. Any results come at a high cost and are simply not reliable.
      - alphan0n 2y ago
        Seems like it can count just fine: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42391312 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42391312 Maybe you’re using it wrong.
      - adastra22 2y ago
        What ChatGPT actually sees when you input that question is the output of the tokenizer: [5299, 1991, 18151, 553, 306, 290, 2195, 392, 491, 33465, 69029] This happens to be 11 tokens, but I think that's a coincidence. Token 491 is "int" and token 33465 is "elligence", but ChatGPT doesn't actually see the letters. How can you expect it to count, given those limitations? It had to guess how many letters each token represented. It got close, but not exact. This is an artificial example pretty much maximally designed for ChatGPT to screw up.

5 points by crazymoka 2y ago

Do you really think they would make it public or use it to their advantage for as long as possible?

Personally, I don't think the question is terribly relevant because I see no reason to believe AGI is possible with a binary logic playback device (aka a computer as we know it) and certainly not using relatively simple, statistical algorithms and lots of storage. Expecting AGI to just spring forth from a box of inert electrical silicon-based switches is like expecting a hammer to start driving nails on it's own. It's a modern form of alchemy --- expecting a fantastical result from trial and error with only limited understanding of the processes required.

PaulHoule 2y ago
E.g. do you have an argument better than Penrose's "I can only do math because I'm a thetan?"
- jqpabc123 2y ago
  Do you have an argument better than "Miracles do happen"?
  - PaulHoule 2y ago
    Define a miracle. That's the problem with intelligence. One day chess was considered a form of intelligence, that got solved by alpha-beta search and there was no longer a miracle. Or is it that visual recognition models since YoLo are a miracle in the sense of practical image recognition?

adastra22 2y ago

You’re going to have to define what you mean, because ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence with general problem solving capabilities. So, yes OpenAI would make AGI available. They already did.

jqpabc123 2y ago
Q: How many letters are in the word "intelligence"? A: The word "intelligence" contains 11 letters: i-n-t-e-l-l-i-g-e-n-c-e. Wrong! The correct answer is 12. This is definitely not AGI! It is a crude statistical attempt that some people confuse with AGI.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- adastra22 2y ago
  Again, you need to define AGI. According to the classical definition of the term by the people who coined it, the example you gave proves that it is AGI. You were able to specify a problem using a fully generic interface (chat) that the AI was not specifically trained on, and it got an answer close to the right answer. The process it used to generate that answer is general intelligence.
  - jqpabc123 2y ago
    Semantics aside, it is definitely lacking and leaves much to be desired in terms of "intelligence". Either it didn't understand the question or it can't count --- take your pick. Any results come at a high cost and are simply not reliable.
    - alphan0n 2y ago
      Seems like it can count just fine: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42391312 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42391312 Maybe you’re using it wrong.
    - adastra22 2y ago
      What ChatGPT actually sees when you input that question is the output of the tokenizer: [5299, 1991, 18151, 553, 306, 290, 2195, 392, 491, 33465, 69029] This happens to be 11 tokens, but I think that's a coincidence. Token 491 is "int" and token 33465 is "elligence", but ChatGPT doesn't actually see the letters. How can you expect it to count, given those limitations? It had to guess how many letters each token represented. It got close, but not exact. This is an artificial example pretty much maximally designed for ChatGPT to screw up.