3 ms·

The "G" part of AGI implies it should be able to hit all the arbitrary yard sticks

whynotminot 1y ago
That is stupid. It would be possible to be infinitely arbitrary to the point of “AGI” never being reachable by some yard sticks while still performing most viable labor.
- alterom 1y ago
  >It would be possible to be infinitely arbitrary to the point of “AGI” never being reachable by some yard sticks while still performing most viable labor. "Most viable labor" involves getting things from one place to another, and that's not even the hard part of it. In any case, any sane definition of general AI would entail things that people can generally do. Like driving. >That is stupid That's just, like, your opinion, man.
  - whynotminot 1y ago
    I had a friend who had his Tesla drive him from his driveway in another city 3+ hrs away to my driveway with no intervention. I feel like everyone’s opinion on how self-driving is going is still rooted in 2018 or something and no one has updated.
    - alterom 1y ago
      >I had a friend who had his Tesla drive him from his driveway in another city 3+ hrs away to my driveway with no intervention. I had anecdata that was data, and it said that full-self-driving is wishful thinking. We cool now?
      - whynotminot 1y ago
        Good luck on your journey. I think the world is going to surprise you, and you’d be better for opening your eyes a little wider.
        alterom 1y ago
        You're absolutely right. The world never ceases to surprise me with its stupidity. Thanks for your contribution.
    - Der_Einzige 1y ago
      Rest assured, your friends driving was the same quality as the average drunk grandma on the road if they were exclusively using Tesla's "FSD" with no intervention for hours. It drives so piss poorly that I have to frequently intervene even on the latest beta software. If I lived in a shoot happy state like Texas I'm sure that a road rager would have put a bullet hole somewhere in my Tesla by now if I kept driving like that. There's a difference between "I survived" and "I drive anywhere close to the quality of the average American" - a low bar and one that still is not met by Tesla FSD.
      - alterom 1y ago
        Yeah, and let's not forget that "I drive like a mildly blind idiot" is only a viable (literally) choice when everyone else doesn't do that and compensates for your idiocy.
    - chasd00 1y ago
      ok but have you asked your Tesla to write you a mobile app? AGI would be able to do both. (the self-driving thing is just an example of something AGI would be able to do but an LLM can't)
- onlyrealcuzzo 1y ago
  Is driving is infinitely arbitrary? It's one skill almost everyone on the planet can learn exceptionally easily - which Waymo is on pace to master, but a generalized LLM by itself is still very far from.
  - whynotminot 1y ago
    OP said all yardsticks and I said that was infinitely arbitrary… because it literally is infinitely arbitrary. You can conjure up an infinite amount of yardsticks. As far as driving itself goes as a yardstick, I just don’t find it interesting because we literally have Waymo’s orbiting major cities and Teslas driving on the roads already right now. If that’s the yardstick you want to use, go for it. It just doesn’t seem particularly smart to hang your hat on that one as your Final Boss. It also doesn’t seem particularly useful for defining intelligence itself in an academic sort of way because even humans struggle to drive well in many scenarios. But hey if that’s what you wanna use don’t let me stop you, sure, go for it. I have feeling you’ll need new goalposts relatively soon if you do, though.
- oldestofsports 1y ago
  So why are your arbitrary yard sticks more valid than someone elses? Probable the biggest problem as others have stated is that we can’t really define intelligence more precisely than that it is something most humans have and all rocks don’t. So how could any definition for AGI be any more precise?
  - whynotminot 1y ago
    Where did I say my yardsticks are better? I don’t even think I set out any of mine I said having to satisfy “all” the yard sticks is stupid, because one could conceive a truly infinite number of arbitrary yard sticks.
mschuster91 1y ago
Humans are the benchmarks for AGI and yet a lot of people are outright dumb: > Said one park ranger, “There is considerable overlap between the intelligence of the smartest bears and the dumbest tourists.” [1] https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/08/security_is_a_t.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/08/security_is_a...
- pixl97 1y ago
  And using humans as 'the benchmark' is risky in itself as it can leave us with blind spots on AI behavior. For example we find humans aren't as general as we expected, or the "we made the terminator and it's exterminating mankind, but it's not AGI because it doesn't have feelings" issues.

That is stupid. It would be possible to be infinitely arbitrary to the point of “AGI” never being reachable by some yard sticks while still performing most viable labor.

alterom 1y ago
>It would be possible to be infinitely arbitrary to the point of “AGI” never being reachable by some yard sticks while still performing most viable labor. "Most viable labor" involves getting things from one place to another, and that's not even the hard part of it. In any case, any sane definition of general AI would entail things that people can generally do. Like driving. >That is stupid That's just, like, your opinion, man.
- whynotminot 1y ago
  I had a friend who had his Tesla drive him from his driveway in another city 3+ hrs away to my driveway with no intervention. I feel like everyone’s opinion on how self-driving is going is still rooted in 2018 or something and no one has updated.
  - alterom 1y ago
    >I had a friend who had his Tesla drive him from his driveway in another city 3+ hrs away to my driveway with no intervention. I had anecdata that was data, and it said that full-self-driving is wishful thinking. We cool now?
    - whynotminot 1y ago
      Good luck on your journey. I think the world is going to surprise you, and you’d be better for opening your eyes a little wider.
      - alterom 1y ago
        You're absolutely right. The world never ceases to surprise me with its stupidity. Thanks for your contribution.
  - Der_Einzige 1y ago
    Rest assured, your friends driving was the same quality as the average drunk grandma on the road if they were exclusively using Tesla's "FSD" with no intervention for hours. It drives so piss poorly that I have to frequently intervene even on the latest beta software. If I lived in a shoot happy state like Texas I'm sure that a road rager would have put a bullet hole somewhere in my Tesla by now if I kept driving like that. There's a difference between "I survived" and "I drive anywhere close to the quality of the average American" - a low bar and one that still is not met by Tesla FSD.
    - alterom 1y ago
      Yeah, and let's not forget that "I drive like a mildly blind idiot" is only a viable (literally) choice when everyone else doesn't do that and compensates for your idiocy.
  - chasd00 1y ago
    ok but have you asked your Tesla to write you a mobile app? AGI would be able to do both. (the self-driving thing is just an example of something AGI would be able to do but an LLM can't)
onlyrealcuzzo 1y ago
Is driving is infinitely arbitrary? It's one skill almost everyone on the planet can learn exceptionally easily - which Waymo is on pace to master, but a generalized LLM by itself is still very far from.
- whynotminot 1y ago
  OP said all yardsticks and I said that was infinitely arbitrary… because it literally is infinitely arbitrary. You can conjure up an infinite amount of yardsticks. As far as driving itself goes as a yardstick, I just don’t find it interesting because we literally have Waymo’s orbiting major cities and Teslas driving on the roads already right now. If that’s the yardstick you want to use, go for it. It just doesn’t seem particularly smart to hang your hat on that one as your Final Boss. It also doesn’t seem particularly useful for defining intelligence itself in an academic sort of way because even humans struggle to drive well in many scenarios. But hey if that’s what you wanna use don’t let me stop you, sure, go for it. I have feeling you’ll need new goalposts relatively soon if you do, though.
oldestofsports 1y ago
So why are your arbitrary yard sticks more valid than someone elses? Probable the biggest problem as others have stated is that we can’t really define intelligence more precisely than that it is something most humans have and all rocks don’t. So how could any definition for AGI be any more precise?
- whynotminot 1y ago
  Where did I say my yardsticks are better? I don’t even think I set out any of mine I said having to satisfy “all” the yard sticks is stupid, because one could conceive a truly infinite number of arbitrary yard sticks.

mschuster91 1y ago

Humans are the benchmarks for AGI and yet a lot of people are outright dumb: > Said one park ranger, “There is considerable overlap between the intelligence of the smartest bears and the dumbest tourists.” [1] https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/08/security_is_a_t.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/08/security_is_a...

pixl97 1y ago
And using humans as 'the benchmark' is risky in itself as it can leave us with blind spots on AI behavior. For example we find humans aren't as general as we expected, or the "we made the terminator and it's exterminating mankind, but it's not AGI because it doesn't have feelings" issues.