5 ms·

...Why?

cosmosgenius 11mo ago
AGI might be possible with more Param+Data scaling for LLM. It is not completely within the realm of impossible given that there is no proof yet of "limits" of LLM. Current limitation is definitely on the hardware side.
- capyba 11mo ago
  The processing capability of today’s CPU’s and GPU’s is insane. From handheld devices to data centers, the capability to manipulate absurd amounts of data in fractions of a second is everywhere. It’s not the hardware, it’s the algorithms.
  - cosmosgenius 11mo ago
    Maybe it is the algorithms. But just by doing a op for an 10^25 param llm is definitely not feasible on todays hardware. Emergent properties does happen at high density. Emergent properties might even look as AGI.
- ChicagoDave 11mo ago
  This is what I'm talking about. The correct tech would enable the strands of information in a vector to "see" each other and "talk" to each other without any intervention. This isn't the same as using a shovel to bash someone's head in. AGI would need tech that finds a previously undocumented solution to a problem by relating many things together, making a hypothesis, testing it, proving it, then acting on it. LLM tech will never do this. Something else might. Maybe someone will invent Asimov's positronic brain. I think _maybe_ quantum computing might be the tech that moves AGI closer. But I'm 99.9999% certain it won't be LLM tech. (Even I can't seriously say 100% for most things, though I am 100% certain a monkey will not fly out of my butt today)
  - cosmosgenius 11mo ago
    LMAO! That Bruce Almighty reference had me rolling. Good one.
  - cosmosgenius 11mo ago
    Quantum compute would definite make a leap to moving closer to AGI. Calculating probability vector is very natural for quantum computer or more precisely any analog compute system would do. qubits==size(vocab) with some acceptable precision would work i believe.
A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 11mo ago
Because always/never are absolutes that are either very easy or very hard to see through. For example, 'I will never die', 'I will never tell a lie', 'I will never eat a pie' all suffer through this despite dying being the most implausible. And it gets worse as we get most abstract: 'Machine will always know where to go from here on now'.

...Why?

AGI might be possible with more Param+Data scaling for LLM. It is not completely within the realm of impossible given that there is no proof yet of "limits" of LLM. Current limitation is definitely on the hardware side.

capyba 11mo ago
The processing capability of today’s CPU’s and GPU’s is insane. From handheld devices to data centers, the capability to manipulate absurd amounts of data in fractions of a second is everywhere. It’s not the hardware, it’s the algorithms.
- cosmosgenius 11mo ago
  Maybe it is the algorithms. But just by doing a op for an 10^25 param llm is definitely not feasible on todays hardware. Emergent properties does happen at high density. Emergent properties might even look as AGI.
ChicagoDave 11mo ago
This is what I'm talking about. The correct tech would enable the strands of information in a vector to "see" each other and "talk" to each other without any intervention. This isn't the same as using a shovel to bash someone's head in. AGI would need tech that finds a previously undocumented solution to a problem by relating many things together, making a hypothesis, testing it, proving it, then acting on it. LLM tech will never do this. Something else might. Maybe someone will invent Asimov's positronic brain. I think _maybe_ quantum computing might be the tech that moves AGI closer. But I'm 99.9999% certain it won't be LLM tech. (Even I can't seriously say 100% for most things, though I am 100% certain a monkey will not fly out of my butt today)
- cosmosgenius 11mo ago
  LMAO! That Bruce Almighty reference had me rolling. Good one.
- cosmosgenius 11mo ago
  Quantum compute would definite make a leap to moving closer to AGI. Calculating probability vector is very natural for quantum computer or more precisely any analog compute system would do. qubits==size(vocab) with some acceptable precision would work i believe.

A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 11mo ago

Because always/never are absolutes that are either very easy or very hard to see through. For example, 'I will never die', 'I will never tell a lie', 'I will never eat a pie' all suffer through this despite dying being the most implausible. And it gets worse as we get most abstract: 'Machine will always know where to go from here on now'.