zlacker

[return to "Three senior researchers have resigned from OpenAI"]
1. Shank+Qf[view] [source] 2023-11-18 09:27:43
>>convex+(OP)
It seems like firing Sam and causing this massive brain drain might be antithetical to the whole AGI mission of the original non-profit. If OpenAI loses everyone to Sam and he starts some new AI company, it probably won't be capped-profit and just be a normal company. All of the organizational safeguards OpenAI had inked with Microsoft and protection against "selling AGI" once-developed are out-the-window if he just builds AGI at a new company.

I'm not saying this will happen, but it seems to me like an incredibly silly move.

◧◩
2. keepam+Xx[view] [source] 2023-11-18 11:56:01
>>Shank+Qf
I think the surprising truth is that all of these people are essentially replaceable.

They may be geniuses, but AGI is an idea whose time has come: geniuses are no longer required to get us there.

The Singularity train has already left the station.

Inevitability.

Now humanity is just waiting for it to arrive at our stop

◧◩◪
3. bernie+rz[view] [source] 2023-11-18 12:06:00
>>keepam+Xx
I disagree. I don’t think LLMs are a pathway to AGI. I think LLMs will lead to incredibly powerful game-changing tools and will drive changes that affect the course of humanity, but this technology won’t lead to AGI directly.

I think AGI is going to arrive via a different technology, many years in the future still.

LLMs will get to the point where they appear to be AGI, but only in the same way the latest 3D rendering technology can create images that appear to be real.

◧◩◪◨
4. keepam+vC[view] [source] 2023-11-18 12:26:00
>>bernie+rz
I'm not saying LLMs are. LLMs are not the only thing going on right now. But they do enable a powerful tool.

I think the path to AGI is: embodiment. Give it a body, let it explore a world, fight to survive, learn action and consequence. Then AGI you will have.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. pixl97+4u1[view] [source] 2023-11-18 17:37:22
>>keepam+vC
Note that embodiment doesn't mean in anyway human or animal like.

For example, you're limited to one body, but an A,G|S,I could have thousands of different bodies feeding back data to a processing facility, learning from billions of different sensors.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. keepam+XI2[view] [source] 2023-11-19 00:37:50
>>pixl97+4u1
Well, I disagree with you on embodiment, but on the thousands? Right that’s another part: evolution. Spread your bets.

But I disagree about a human or animal body not being required.

I think we have to take the world as we see it and appreciate our own limitations in that what we think of intelligence fundamentally arises out of our evolution in this world; our embodiment and response to this world.

so I think we do need to give it a body and let it explore this world.

I don’t think the virtual bodies thing is gonna work. I don’t think letting it explore the Internet is gonna work. you have to give it a body multiple senses let it survive. That’s how you get AGI, not not virtual embodiment. Which I never meant, but thought it was obvious given the term embody minute self strongly, suggesting something that’s not virtual! Hahaha ! :)

[go to top]