2 ms·
It's not silly, it is in fact a clear necessity to have both of these for something to be even close to AGI. And you additionally need it trained on many other
by tsimionescu 1y ago
It's not silly, it is in fact a clear necessity to have both of these for something to be even close to AGI. And you additionally need it trained on many other tasks - if you believe that each task requires additional parameters and additional training data, then it becomes very clear that we are nowhere near to a general intelligence system; and it should also be pretty clear that this will not scale to 100 tasks with anything similar to the current hardware and training algorithms.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]