BigMuffin69

joined 7 months ago
[–] BigMuffin69@awful.systems 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

ong this is the funniest shit i've seen in a while, pls be real

[–] BigMuffin69@awful.systems 14 points 3 days ago (1 children)

:( I just wanted to see how many electrons I could make dance on the head of a wafer, I didn't mean to hurt anyone :(

[–] BigMuffin69@awful.systems 8 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (7 children)

It's the weekend B) time to check in on the doomers w/ Dr. Torres...

Oh damn! I missed the irrefutable evidence of LLM reasoning. They must have done a series of replicable experiments that contradicts the overwhelming evidence that LLM reasoning is more or less a series of pattern matching heuristics. Let's take a look together at their data lads, let the scales fall from our eyes.

... this is their confirmation of reasoning? And they say we are the ones who are fucking coping, lmaou.

[–] BigMuffin69@awful.systems 14 points 1 week ago (6 children)

It's amazing to watch them flock together like this, nature is beautiful 😍

[–] BigMuffin69@awful.systems 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

5.) Why do people keep calling us weird?

[–] BigMuffin69@awful.systems 14 points 1 week ago

I cannot get over the fact that this man child who is so concerned with "the future of humanity" is both out right trying to buy the presidency and downplaying the very real weapons that can easily wipe out 70% of the Earth's population in 2 hours. Remember ya'll, the cost of microwaving the world is negligible compared to the power of spicy autocomplete.

[–] BigMuffin69@awful.systems 16 points 1 week ago (13 children)

The once and future king + ol' muskrat give their most sensible total nuclear annihilation takes. Fellas, are we cooked?

[–] BigMuffin69@awful.systems 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

omg, next time my wife asks me how she looks, I'm definitely dropping that "legible magyar admixture"

Edit: Didn't work. She started talking about how in the old country, the Hungarians chased her family out of the village for being religious minorities. I give this approach 0 bags of popcorn and a magen david.

[–] BigMuffin69@awful.systems 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Careful David, if you deny that rocks (and therefore the moon) are conscious, you might make them angry.

[–] BigMuffin69@awful.systems 6 points 1 week ago (8 children)

but I do believe brains are computers, but only in the broadest sense of what computation could be

Agree. A human brain is capable of executing the steps of a TM with pen/paper, and in that sense the brain is absolutely capable of acting as a computer. But as far as all the other process a brain does (breathing/maintaining heart rate/etc.) describing that as 'a computer' seems such an abuse of notation as to render the original definition meaningless. We might as well call the moon a computer since it is 'calculating' the effect of a gravitational field on a moon sized object. What I think many people are really claiming when they say a brain is a computer is that if only we could identify the correct finite state deterministic program, there would be no difference between the brain and its implementation in silicon. Personally, I find claims of substrate independence to be less plausible, but of course many of our dear friends are willing to bite that bullet.

[–] BigMuffin69@awful.systems 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

what are you on? The brain is clearly a series of pipes that water flows through

 

Folks in the field of AI like to make predictions for AGI. I have thoughts, and I’ve always wanted to write them down. Let’s do that.

Since this isn’t something I’ve touched on in the past, I’ll start by doing my best to define what I mean by “general intelligence”: a generally intelligent entity is one that achieves a special synthesis of three things:

A way of interacting with and observing a complex environment. Typically this means embodiment: the ability to perceive and interact with the natural world. A robust world model covering the environment. This is the mechanism which allows an entity to perform quick inference with a reasonable accuracy. World models in humans are generally referred to as “intuition”, “fast thinking” or “system 1 thinking”. A mechanism for performing deep introspection on arbitrary topics. This is thought of in many different ways – it is “reasoning”, “slow thinking” or “system 2 thinking”. If you have these three things, you can build a generally intelligent agent. Here’s how:

First, you seed your agent with one or more objectives. Have the agent use system 2 thinking in conjunction with its world model to start ideating ways to optimize for its objectives. It picks the best idea and builds a plan. It uses this plan to take an action on the world. It observes the result of this action and compares that result with the expectation it had based on its world model. It might update its world model here with the new knowledge gained. It uses system 2 thinking to make alterations to the plan (or idea). Rinse and repeat.

My definition for general intelligence is an agent that can coherently execute the above cycle repeatedly over long periods of time, thereby being able to attempt to optimize any objective.

The capacity to actually achieve arbitrary objectives is not a requirement. Some objectives are simply too hard. Adaptability and coherence are the key: can the agent use what it knows to synthesize a plan, and is it able to continuously act towards a single objective over long time periods.

So with that out of the way – where do I think we are on the path to building a general intelligence?

World Models We’re already building world models with autoregressive transformers, particularly of the “omnimodel” variety. How robust they are is up for debate. There’s good news, though: in my experience, scale improves robustness and humanity is currently pouring capital into scaling autoregressive models. So we can expect robustness to improve.

With that said, I suspect the world models we have right now are sufficient to build a generally intelligent agent.

Side note: I also suspect that robustness can be further improved via the interaction of system 2 thinking and observing the real world. This is a paradigm we haven’t really seen in AI yet, but happens all the time in living things. It’s a very important mechanism for improving robustness.

When LLM skeptics like Yann say we haven’t yet achieved the intelligence of a cat – this is the point that they are missing. Yes, LLMs still lack some basic knowledge that every cat has, but they could learn that knowledge – given the ability to self-improve in this way. And such self-improvement is doable with transformers and the right ingredients.

Reasoning There is not a well known way to achieve system 2 thinking, but I am quite confident that it is possible within the transformer paradigm with the technology and compute we have available to us right now. I estimate that we are 2-3 years away from building a mechanism for system 2 thinking which is sufficiently good for the cycle I described above.

Embodiment Embodiment is something we’re still figuring out with AI but which is something I am once again quite optimistic about near-term advancements. There is a convergence currently happening between the field of robotics and LLMs that is hard to ignore.

Robots are becoming extremely capable – able to respond to very abstract commands like “move forward”, “get up”, “kick ball”, “reach for object”, etc. For example, see what Figure is up to or the recently released Unitree H1.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, large Omnimodels give us a way to map arbitrary sensory inputs into commands which can be sent to these sophisticated robotics systems.

I’ve been spending a lot of time lately walking around outside talking to GPT-4o while letting it observe the world through my smartphone camera. I like asking it questions to test its knowledge of the physical world. It’s far from perfect, but it is surprisingly capable. We’re close to being able to deploy systems which can commit coherent strings of actions on the environment and observe (and understand) the results. I suspect we’re going to see some really impressive progress in the next 1-2 years here.

This is the field of AI I am personally most excited in, and I plan to spend most of my time working on this over the coming years.

TL;DR In summary – we’ve basically solved building world models, have 2-3 years on system 2 thinking, and 1-2 years on embodiment. The latter two can be done concurrently. Once all of the ingredients have been built, we need to integrate them together and build the cycling algorithm I described above. I’d give that another 1-2 years.

So my current estimate is 3-5 years for AGI. I’m leaning towards 3 for something that looks an awful lot like a generally intelligent, embodied agent (which I would personally call an AGI). Then a few more years to refine it to the point that we can convince the Gary Marcus’ of the world.

Really excited to see how this ages. 🙂

 

 
 

Then: Google fired Blake Lemoine for saying AIs are sentient

Now: Geoffrey Hinton, the #1 most cited AI scientist, quits Google & says AIs are sentient

That makes 2 of the 3 most cited scientists:

  • Ilya Sutskever (#3) said they may be (Andrej Karpathy agreed)
  • Yoshua Bengio (#2) has not opined on this to my knowledge? Anyone know?

Also, ALL 3 of the most cited AI scientists are very concerned about AI extinction risk.

ALL 3 switched from working on AI capabilities to AI safety.

Anyone who still dismisses this as “silly sci-fi” is insulting the most eminent scientists of this field.

Anyway, brace yourselves… the Overton Window on AI sentience/consciousness/self-awareness is about to blow open>

view more: next ›