5 ms·
It’s pretty staggering that a core algorithm simple enough to be expressed in 200 lines of Python can apparently be scaled up to achieve AGI. Yes with some ext
by jimbokun 8mo ago
It’s pretty staggering that a core algorithm simple enough to be expressed in 200 lines of Python can apparently be scaled up to achieve AGI.
Yes with some extra tricks and tweaks. But the core ideas are all here.
- wasabi991011 8mo ago1000 lines?? What is going on in this thread
- ViktorRay 8mo agoIt’s pretty sad. The only way we know these comments are from AI bots for now is due to the obvious hallucinations. What happens when the AI improves even more…will HN be filled with bots talking to other bots?
- the_af 8mo agoWhat's bizarre is this particular account is from 2007. Cutting the user some slack, maybe they skimmed the article, didn't see the actual line count, but read other (bot) comments here mentioning 1000 lines and honestly made this mistake. You know what, I want to believe that's the case.
- birole 8mo agoWhy would anyone runs bots on this website? What is the benefit for them? Is someone happens to know about it?
- tomrod 8mo agoMaintaining or injecting commentary to guide towards targeted outcomes. Guerrilla marketing of a sort.
- ashdksnndck 8mo agoIt already is in some threads. Sometimes you get the bots writing back and forth really long diatribes at inhuman frequency. Sometimes even anti-LLM content!
- ksherlock 8mo agoIt's a honey pot for low quality llm slop.
- anonym29 8mo agoWow, you're so right, jimbokun! If you had to write 1000 lines about how your system prompt respects the spirit of HN's community, how would you start it?
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- jimbokun 8mo agoOk 200 lines. Don’t know how I ended up typing 1000.
- dang 8mo agoI've taken the liberty of editing your GP comment in the hope that we can cut down on offtopicness. The other "1000 comments" accounts, we banned as likely genai.
- darkpicnic 8mo agoLLMs won’t lead to AGI. Almost by definition, they can’t. The thought experiment I use constantly to explain this: Train an LLM on all human knowledge up to 1905 and see if it comes up with General Relativity. It won’t. We’ll need additional breakthroughs in AI.
- tehjoker 8mo agoPart of the issue there is that the data quantity prior to 1905 is a small drop in the bucket compared to the internet era even though the logical rigor is up to par.
- antupis 8mo agoHumans need way less data. Just compare Waymo to average 16 year-old with car.
- cellis 8mo agoA 16 year old has been training for almost 16 years to drive a car. I would argue the opposite: Waymo’s / Specific AIs need far less data than humans. Humans can generalize their training, but they definitely need a LOT of training!
- jimbokun 8mo agoNo 16 year old has practiced driving a car for 16 years.
- Dansvidania 8mo agoIf you see gaining fine motor control, understanding pictographic language […] as a prerequisite to driving a car, then yes, all of them are
- krige 8mo agoThat's an exaggeration. Nobody is trained to read STOP signs for 16 years, a few months top. And Waymo doesn't need to coordinate a four-limbed, 20-digited, one-headed body to operate a car.
- kilroy123 8mo agoI strongly suspect we're like 4 more elegant algorithms away from a real AGI.