4 ms·

Sounds like he is sucking up to the Dear Leader and his sponsors again.

gruez 1y ago
The pro-singularity/AGI people genuinely seem to believe that takeoff is going to happen within the next decade, so they should get a pass on the "haha they're saying that because they want to pander to Trump" accusations.
- mschuster91 1y ago
  > The pro-singularity/AGI people genuinely seem to believe that takeoff is going to happen within the next decade I'm as anti-AI as it can get - it has its uses, but it is still fundamentally built on outright sharting on all kinds of ethics, and that's just the training phase - the actual usage is filled with even more snake-oil salesmen and fraudsters, and that's not to speak of all the jobs for humans that are going to be irreversibly replaced by AI. But I think the AGI people are actually correct in their assumption - somewhen the next 10-20 years, the AGI milestone will be hit. Most probably not on LLM basis, but it will hit. And societies are absolutely not prepared to deal with the fallout, quite the contrary - particularly the current US administration is throwing us all in front of the multibillionaire wolves.
  - benterix 1y ago
    > somewhen the next 10-20 years, the AGI milestone will be hit You seem quite confident for a person who doesn't offer any arguments on why it would happen at all, and why within two decades specifically, especially if you claim it won't be LLM-based. Second, if AGI means that ChatGPT doesn't hallucinate and has a practically infinite context window, that's good for humanity but I fail to see any of the usual terrible things happening like the "fallout" you mention. We'll adapt just like we adapted to using LLMs.
    - mschuster91 1y ago
      > You seem quite confident for a person who doesn't offer any arguments on why it would happen at all, and why within two decades specifically, especially if you claim it won't be LLM-based. Rather sooner than later, IMHO the sheer amount of global compute capacity available will be enough to achieve that task. Brute force, basically. Doesn't take much imagination other than looking at how exponential curves work. > that's good for humanity but I fail to see any of the usual terrible things happening like the "fallout" you mention. A decent-enough AI, especially an AGI, will displace a lot of white collar workers - creatives are already getting hit hard and that is with AI still not being able to paint realistic fingers, and the typical "paper pusher" jobs will also be replaced by AI. In the "meatspace", aka robots doing tasks that are _for now_ not achievable by robots (say because the haptic feedback is lacking) there has been pretty impressive research happening over the last years. So that's a lot of blue collar / trades jobs going to go away as well when the mechanical bodies are linked up to an AI control system. > We'll adapt just like we adapted to using LLMs. Yeah, we just stuck the finger towards those affected. That's not adaptation, that's leaving people to be eaten by the wolves. We're fast heading for a select few megacorporations holding all the power when it comes to AI, and everyone else will be serfs or outright slaves to them instead of the old scifi dreams where humans would be able to chill out and relax all day.
      - benterix 1y ago
        > Rather sooner than later, IMHO the sheer amount of global compute capacity available will be enough to achieve that task. Brute force, basically. Doesn't take much imagination other than looking at how exponential curves work. Only assuming there is something to be found apart from the imagination itself. We can imagine AGI easily but it doesn't mean it exists, and even if it does, that we will discover it. By that logic - we want something and we spent a lot of compute resources on it - the success of a project like SETI would be guaranteed based on funding alone. In other words, there is a huge gap between something that we are sure can be done, but it requires a lot of resources, like a round trip to Mars, and we can even speculate it can be done within 10-20 years (and still be wrong by a couple of decades) on the one hand, and something we just hope to discover based on the amount of GPUs available, without slightest clue of success other than funding and our desire for it to happen.
  - NuclearPM 1y ago
    Somewhen?

The pro-singularity/AGI people genuinely seem to believe that takeoff is going to happen within the next decade, so they should get a pass on the "haha they're saying that because they want to pander to Trump" accusations.

mschuster91 1y ago
> The pro-singularity/AGI people genuinely seem to believe that takeoff is going to happen within the next decade I'm as anti-AI as it can get - it has its uses, but it is still fundamentally built on outright sharting on all kinds of ethics, and that's just the training phase - the actual usage is filled with even more snake-oil salesmen and fraudsters, and that's not to speak of all the jobs for humans that are going to be irreversibly replaced by AI. But I think the AGI people are actually correct in their assumption - somewhen the next 10-20 years, the AGI milestone will be hit. Most probably not on LLM basis, but it will hit. And societies are absolutely not prepared to deal with the fallout, quite the contrary - particularly the current US administration is throwing us all in front of the multibillionaire wolves.
- benterix 1y ago
  > somewhen the next 10-20 years, the AGI milestone will be hit You seem quite confident for a person who doesn't offer any arguments on why it would happen at all, and why within two decades specifically, especially if you claim it won't be LLM-based. Second, if AGI means that ChatGPT doesn't hallucinate and has a practically infinite context window, that's good for humanity but I fail to see any of the usual terrible things happening like the "fallout" you mention. We'll adapt just like we adapted to using LLMs.
  - mschuster91 1y ago
    > You seem quite confident for a person who doesn't offer any arguments on why it would happen at all, and why within two decades specifically, especially if you claim it won't be LLM-based. Rather sooner than later, IMHO the sheer amount of global compute capacity available will be enough to achieve that task. Brute force, basically. Doesn't take much imagination other than looking at how exponential curves work. > that's good for humanity but I fail to see any of the usual terrible things happening like the "fallout" you mention. A decent-enough AI, especially an AGI, will displace a lot of white collar workers - creatives are already getting hit hard and that is with AI still not being able to paint realistic fingers, and the typical "paper pusher" jobs will also be replaced by AI. In the "meatspace", aka robots doing tasks that are _for now_ not achievable by robots (say because the haptic feedback is lacking) there has been pretty impressive research happening over the last years. So that's a lot of blue collar / trades jobs going to go away as well when the mechanical bodies are linked up to an AI control system. > We'll adapt just like we adapted to using LLMs. Yeah, we just stuck the finger towards those affected. That's not adaptation, that's leaving people to be eaten by the wolves. We're fast heading for a select few megacorporations holding all the power when it comes to AI, and everyone else will be serfs or outright slaves to them instead of the old scifi dreams where humans would be able to chill out and relax all day.
    - benterix 1y ago
      > Rather sooner than later, IMHO the sheer amount of global compute capacity available will be enough to achieve that task. Brute force, basically. Doesn't take much imagination other than looking at how exponential curves work. Only assuming there is something to be found apart from the imagination itself. We can imagine AGI easily but it doesn't mean it exists, and even if it does, that we will discover it. By that logic - we want something and we spent a lot of compute resources on it - the success of a project like SETI would be guaranteed based on funding alone. In other words, there is a huge gap between something that we are sure can be done, but it requires a lot of resources, like a round trip to Mars, and we can even speculate it can be done within 10-20 years (and still be wrong by a couple of decades) on the one hand, and something we just hope to discover based on the amount of GPUs available, without slightest clue of success other than funding and our desire for it to happen.
- NuclearPM 1y ago
  Somewhen?