3 ms·

>We want to build for the dream of billions of programmers; billions of artists; billions of scientists—using computing as moldable clay. At that point, why ev

>We want to build for the dream of billions of programmers; billions of artists; billions of scientists—using computing as moldable clay. At that point, why even keep humans in the loop. Just let it exist in the background and generate better ideas than any human would anyway.

observationist 2y ago
Just let the car go wherever it wants, faster than any human would anyway. Or - just let the fire exist in the background, it'll generate more heat than humans will ever need anyway. The point isn't to make humans pointless. The point is to empower humans. We need to remain in control, and be the users of the tool, and not a tool for some mindless system. Intelligence and consciousness are separate things - you can automate a lot of intelligence without having even rudimentary consciousness or self awareness - LLMs currently in operation are at most pseudo-conscious within their test-time contexts, and even then, every pass resets whatever awareness there might be. With millions of tokens context length, that might start to enter into the realm of a thing we should be concerned about, but even then, there's no ongoing persisted state to carry anything between passes aside from the text or image patch tokens or what have you. What this means, essentially, is that we can augment our human capabilities without usurping the agency of some artificial being - these AIs are not individual moral agents in their own right, and likely will never be unless we specifically build that recursion and persistent state into the models, and incorporate a realtime adaptive self and world construct. This means that the software is a tool - use the tool to augment your life and be a force multiplier in everything you do. The scope of intelligence augmentation has leapt from spreadsheets to nearly every cognitive domain in the human experience - people proficient with excel were better accountants than people using pen and paper. People using delivery vans are better than people using a horse and wagon. This new technology means that people using AI will be able to do more, faster, and likely better, than people who don't. With neural lace - whatever form it ends up being - we'll end up with genuine exocortex augmentation. Even without that direct integration, however, the human in the loop is the entire point of this technology. There's a tiny list of things conscious machines might be good for, and all sorts of deep and obvious arguments for not creating a new, self aware, agentic species that's immediately in conflict with and on a trajectory to outcompete humans. Use the tool of AI to be a force multiplier for everything in your life that AI is capable of handling well. This makes you a benevolent dictator for life in your own life, delegating everything that makes sense, working with it to free up your resources for the things that you decide are the highest priority. Spend more time brainstorming, building relationships, deploying resources, and getting the most out of being human. This is the promise of AI, and why people get excited about it. We're going to have a huge struggle, as humanity, in dealing the empowerment and amplification of everything in our lives. Making sure that we retain agency, that humans are ultimately in charge of our own destiny, is probably the most important principle to adhere to, above all others.
- realharo 2y ago
  I was mainly referring to phrases such as "billions of scientists" - the point of science is to solve problems and discover knowledge. If you have an AI good enough to achieve that (billions of scientists), that means it can probably progress without being actively driven by people at all - and probably do a better job at it too. We can still do things "for fun", but our efforts will be more toys than serious projects (except when it comes to relationships with other people).

observationist 2y ago

Just let the car go wherever it wants, faster than any human would anyway. Or - just let the fire exist in the background, it'll generate more heat than humans will ever need anyway. The point isn't to make humans pointless. The point is to empower humans. We need to remain in control, and be the users of the tool, and not a tool for some mindless system. Intelligence and consciousness are separate things - you can automate a lot of intelligence without having even rudimentary consciousness or self awareness - LLMs currently in operation are at most pseudo-conscious within their test-time contexts, and even then, every pass resets whatever awareness there might be. With millions of tokens context length, that might start to enter into the realm of a thing we should be concerned about, but even then, there's no ongoing persisted state to carry anything between passes aside from the text or image patch tokens or what have you. What this means, essentially, is that we can augment our human capabilities without usurping the agency of some artificial being - these AIs are not individual moral agents in their own right, and likely will never be unless we specifically build that recursion and persistent state into the models, and incorporate a realtime adaptive self and world construct. This means that the software is a tool - use the tool to augment your life and be a force multiplier in everything you do. The scope of intelligence augmentation has leapt from spreadsheets to nearly every cognitive domain in the human experience - people proficient with excel were better accountants than people using pen and paper. People using delivery vans are better than people using a horse and wagon. This new technology means that people using AI will be able to do more, faster, and likely better, than people who don't. With neural lace - whatever form it ends up being - we'll end up with genuine exocortex augmentation. Even without that direct integration, however, the human in the loop is the entire point of this technology. There's a tiny list of things conscious machines might be good for, and all sorts of deep and obvious arguments for not creating a new, self aware, agentic species that's immediately in conflict with and on a trajectory to outcompete humans. Use the tool of AI to be a force multiplier for everything in your life that AI is capable of handling well. This makes you a benevolent dictator for life in your own life, delegating everything that makes sense, working with it to free up your resources for the things that you decide are the highest priority. Spend more time brainstorming, building relationships, deploying resources, and getting the most out of being human. This is the promise of AI, and why people get excited about it. We're going to have a huge struggle, as humanity, in dealing the empowerment and amplification of everything in our lives. Making sure that we retain agency, that humans are ultimately in charge of our own destiny, is probably the most important principle to adhere to, above all others.

realharo 2y ago
I was mainly referring to phrases such as "billions of scientists" - the point of science is to solve problems and discover knowledge. If you have an AI good enough to achieve that (billions of scientists), that means it can probably progress without being actively driven by people at all - and probably do a better job at it too. We can still do things "for fun", but our efforts will be more toys than serious projects (except when it comes to relationships with other people).