3 ms·
Another interesting discrepancy is that people think current GPUs are maybe capable of running AGI but they still can barely manage photorealistic rendering of
by atom_arranger 2mo ago
Another interesting discrepancy is that people think current GPUs are maybe capable of running AGI but they still can barely manage photorealistic rendering of a single room in realtime, or simulate something like a shirt thrown into a pile of laundry. They can generate a video of it based on millions of existing videos, but not do a real simulation of light and physics in realtime.
- TheBicPen 2mo agoAn AGI doesn't need that level of detail to do most tasks effectively. To use the OP's example, a cat catching a bug out of the air does not need to run a fluid dynamics simulation of airflow over the bug's wings to be able to catch it. A cheap approximation of the flight path is sufficient. Perhaps some physical tasks will need that level of detail but many will not.
- TonyStr 2mo agoIs the human brain capable of doing real simulations of light and physics in realtime? Or does it hallucinate the details and represent some low-resolution mental image? You may be overestimating the capabilities of flesh-based neural networks and underestimating the capabilities of silicon-based neural networks.
- atom_arranger 2mo agoThat's a good point. It's just kind of surprising, there's been a lot of incremental progress towards rendering and simulation for a long time. If you'd asked 10 years ago if we'd have AGI or realistic realtime rendering and physics of a single room first I think most people would have answered the former.