7 ms·

What's a sign it's going to happen ever?

NoMoreNicksLeft 1y ago
Humans. There are arrangements of atoms that if constructed and activated, act perfectly like human intelligence. Because they are human intelligence. Human intelligence must be deterministic, any other conclusion is equivalent to the claim that there is some sort of "soul" for lack of better term. If human intelligence is deterministic, then it can be written in software. Thus, if we continue to strive to design/create/invent such, it is inevitable that eventually it must happen. Failures to date can be attributed to various factors, but the gist is that we haven't yet identified the principles of intelligent software. My guess is that we need less than 5 million years further development time even in a worst-case scenario. With luck and proper investment, we can get it down well below the 1 million year mark.
- SideburnsOfDoom 1y ago
  > Human intelligence must be deterministic, any other conclusion is equivalent to the claim that there is some sort of "soul" for lack of better term. No, not all processes follow deterministic Newtonian mechanics. It could also be random, unpredictable at times. Are the there random processes in the human brain? Yes, there are random quantum processes in every atom, and there are atoms in the brain. Yes, this is no less materialistic: Humans are still proof that either you believe in souls or such, or that human level intelligence can be made from material atoms. But it's not deterministic. But also, LLMs are not anywhere close to becoming human level intelligence.
  - NoMoreNicksLeft 1y ago
    >It could also be random, unpredictable at times. It isn't. But if it were, we can also write that into the algorithm. >But also, LLMs are not anywhere close to becoming human level intelligence. They're no farther than about 5 million years distant.
- lm28469 1y ago
  > Thus, if we continue to strive to design/create/invent such, it is inevitable that eventually it must happen. ~200 years of industrial revolution and we already fucked up beyond the point of no return, I don't think we'll have resources to continue on this trajectory for 1m years. We might very well be accelerating towards a brick wall, there is absolutely no guarantee we'll hit AGI before hitting the wall
  - NoMoreNicksLeft 1y ago
    >We might very well be accelerating towards a brick wall, there is absolutely no guarantee we'll hit AGI before hitting the wall We've already set the course for human extinction, we're about 6-8 generations away from absolute human extinction. We became functionally extinct 10-15 years ago. Still, if we had another 5 million years, I'm one hundred percent certain we could crack AGI.
- diffeomorphism 1y ago
  > if deterministic, then can be done in software. You just need a few Dyson spheres and someone omniscient to give you all the parameter values. Easy peazy. Just like cracking any encryption: you just brute force all possible passwords. Perfectly deterministic decryption method. </s>
- Paradigma11 1y ago
  "Human intelligence must be deterministic, any other conclusion is equivalent to the claim that there is some sort of "soul" for lack of better term. " Determinism is a metaphysical concept like mathematical platonism or ghosts.
an0malous 1y ago
I used to believe in AGI but the more AI has advanced the more I’ve come to realize that there’s no magic level of intelligence that can cure cancer and figure out warp drives. You need data, which requires experimentation, which requires labor and resources of which there is a finite supply. If you had AGI tomorrow and asked it to cure cancer, it would just ask for more experimental data and resources. Isn’t that what the greatest minds in cancer research would say as well? Why do we think that just being more rational or being able to compute better than humans would be sufficient to solve the problem? It’s very possible that human beings today are already doing the most intelligent things they can given the data and resources they have available. This whole idea that there’s a magic property called intelligence that can solve every problem when it reaches a sufficient level, regardless of what data and resources it has to work with, increasingly just seems like the fantasy of people who think they’re very intelligent.
- SideburnsOfDoom 1y ago
  Agreed. And, if you had AGI tomorrow and asked it to figure out FTL warp drives, it would just explain to you how it's not going to happen. It is impossible, the end. In fact the request is fantasy, nigh nonsensical and self-contradictory. Isn’t that what the greatest minds in physics would say as well? Yes, yes it is. No debate will be entered into on this topic by me today.
  - kragen 1y ago
    Actually, no, it isn't. They say it isn't necessarily possible, but not self-contradictory as far as we know. It's good that you aren't going to debate this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive
    - SideburnsOfDoom 1y ago
      You failed reading comprehension.
      - 1y ago
sampton 1y ago
There needs to be break through papers or hardware that can expand context size in exponential way. Or a new model that can address long term learning.

Humans. There are arrangements of atoms that if constructed and activated, act perfectly like human intelligence. Because they are human intelligence. Human intelligence must be deterministic, any other conclusion is equivalent to the claim that there is some sort of "soul" for lack of better term. If human intelligence is deterministic, then it can be written in software. Thus, if we continue to strive to design/create/invent such, it is inevitable that eventually it must happen. Failures to date can be attributed to various factors, but the gist is that we haven't yet identified the principles of intelligent software. My guess is that we need less than 5 million years further development time even in a worst-case scenario. With luck and proper investment, we can get it down well below the 1 million year mark.

SideburnsOfDoom 1y ago
> Human intelligence must be deterministic, any other conclusion is equivalent to the claim that there is some sort of "soul" for lack of better term. No, not all processes follow deterministic Newtonian mechanics. It could also be random, unpredictable at times. Are the there random processes in the human brain? Yes, there are random quantum processes in every atom, and there are atoms in the brain. Yes, this is no less materialistic: Humans are still proof that either you believe in souls or such, or that human level intelligence can be made from material atoms. But it's not deterministic. But also, LLMs are not anywhere close to becoming human level intelligence.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 1y ago
  >It could also be random, unpredictable at times. It isn't. But if it were, we can also write that into the algorithm. >But also, LLMs are not anywhere close to becoming human level intelligence. They're no farther than about 5 million years distant.
lm28469 1y ago
> Thus, if we continue to strive to design/create/invent such, it is inevitable that eventually it must happen. ~200 years of industrial revolution and we already fucked up beyond the point of no return, I don't think we'll have resources to continue on this trajectory for 1m years. We might very well be accelerating towards a brick wall, there is absolutely no guarantee we'll hit AGI before hitting the wall
- NoMoreNicksLeft 1y ago
  >We might very well be accelerating towards a brick wall, there is absolutely no guarantee we'll hit AGI before hitting the wall We've already set the course for human extinction, we're about 6-8 generations away from absolute human extinction. We became functionally extinct 10-15 years ago. Still, if we had another 5 million years, I'm one hundred percent certain we could crack AGI.
diffeomorphism 1y ago
> if deterministic, then can be done in software. You just need a few Dyson spheres and someone omniscient to give you all the parameter values. Easy peazy. Just like cracking any encryption: you just brute force all possible passwords. Perfectly deterministic decryption method. </s>
Paradigma11 1y ago
"Human intelligence must be deterministic, any other conclusion is equivalent to the claim that there is some sort of "soul" for lack of better term. " Determinism is a metaphysical concept like mathematical platonism or ghosts.

an0malous 1y ago

I used to believe in AGI but the more AI has advanced the more I’ve come to realize that there’s no magic level of intelligence that can cure cancer and figure out warp drives. You need data, which requires experimentation, which requires labor and resources of which there is a finite supply. If you had AGI tomorrow and asked it to cure cancer, it would just ask for more experimental data and resources. Isn’t that what the greatest minds in cancer research would say as well? Why do we think that just being more rational or being able to compute better than humans would be sufficient to solve the problem? It’s very possible that human beings today are already doing the most intelligent things they can given the data and resources they have available. This whole idea that there’s a magic property called intelligence that can solve every problem when it reaches a sufficient level, regardless of what data and resources it has to work with, increasingly just seems like the fantasy of people who think they’re very intelligent.

SideburnsOfDoom 1y ago
Agreed. And, if you had AGI tomorrow and asked it to figure out FTL warp drives, it would just explain to you how it's not going to happen. It is impossible, the end. In fact the request is fantasy, nigh nonsensical and self-contradictory. Isn’t that what the greatest minds in physics would say as well? Yes, yes it is. No debate will be entered into on this topic by me today.
- kragen 1y ago
  Actually, no, it isn't. They say it isn't necessarily possible, but not self-contradictory as far as we know. It's good that you aren't going to debate this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive
  - SideburnsOfDoom 1y ago
    You failed reading comprehension.
    - 1y ago

sampton 1y ago

There needs to be break through papers or hardware that can expand context size in exponential way. Or a new model that can address long term learning.