• masonlee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    Also, by the way, violating a basic social contract to not work towards triggering an intelligence explosion that will likely replace all biological life on Earth with computronium, but who’s counting? :)

    • lunarul@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      That would be a danger if real AI existed. We are very far away from that and what is being called “AI” today (which is advanced ML) is not the path to actual AI. So don’t worry, we’re not heading for the singularity.

        • lunarul@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          https://www.lifewire.com/strong-ai-vs-weak-ai-7508012

          Strong AI, also called artificial general intelligence (AGI), possesses the full range of human capabilities, including talking, reasoning, and emoting. So far, strong AI examples exist in sci-fi movies

          Weak AI is easily identified by its limitations, but strong AI remains theoretical since it should have few (if any) limitations.

          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_general_intelligence

          As of 2023, complete forms of AGI remain speculative.

          Boucher, Philip (March 2019). How artificial intelligence works

          Today’s AI is powerful and useful, but remains far from speculated AGI or ASI.

          https://www.itu.int/en/journal/001/Documents/itu2018-9.pdf

          AGI represents a level of power that remains firmly in the realm of speculative fiction as on date

          • masonlee@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            Ah, I understand you now. You don’t believe we’re close to AGI. I don’t know what to tell you. We’re moving at an incredible clip; AGI is the stated goal of the big AI players. Many experts think we are probably just one or two breakthroughs away. You’ve seen the surveys on timelines? Years to decades. Seems wise to think ahead to its implications rather than dismiss its possibility.

            • lunarul@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              See the sources above and many more. We don’t need one or two breakthroughs, we need a complete paradigm shift. We don’t even know where to start with for AGI. There’s a bunch of research, but nothing really came out of it yet. Weak AI has made impressive bounds in the past few years, but the only connection between weak and strong AI is the name. Weak AI will not become strong AI as it continues to evolve. The two are completely separate avenues of research. Weak AI is still advanced algorithms. You can’t get AGI with just code. We’ll need a completely new type of hardware for it.

              • masonlee@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                9 months ago

                Before Deep Learning recently shifted the AI computing paradigm, I would have written exactly what you wrote. But as of late, the opinion that we need yet another type of hardware to surpass human intelligence seems increasingly rare. Multimodal generative AI is already pretty general. To count as AGI for you, you would like to see the addition of continuous learning and agentification? (Or are you looking for “consciousness”?)

                That said, I’m all for a new paradigm, and favor Russell’s “provably beneficial AI” approach!

                • lunarul@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Deep learning did not shift any paradigm. It’s just more advanced programming. But gen AI is not intelligence. It’s just really well trained ML. ChatGPT can generate text that looks true and relevant. And that’s its goal. It doesn’t have to be true or relevant, it just has to look convincing. And it does. But there’s no form of intelligence at play there. It’s just advanced ML models taking an input and guessing the most likely output.

                  Here’s another interesting article about this debate: https://ourworldindata.org/ai-timelines

                  What we have today does not exhibit even the faintest signs of actual intelligence. Gen AI models don’t actually understand the output they are providing, that’s why they so often produce self-contradictory results. And the algorithms will continue to be fine-tuned to produce fewer such mistakes, but that won’t change the core of what gen AI really is. You can’t teach ChatGPT how to play chess or a new language or music. The same model can be trained to do one of those tasks instead of chatting, but that’s not how intelligence works.