>>thorum+Bu
Reading that thread it’s really interesting to me. I see how far we’ve come in a short couple of years. But I still can’t grasp how we’ll achieve AGI within any reasonable amount of time. It just seems like we’re missing some really critical… something…
Idk. Folks much smarter than I seem worried so maybe I should be too but it just seems like such a long shot.
>>adamta+dH
When it comes to AI, as a rule, you should assume that whatever has been made public by a company like OpenAI is AT LEAST 6 months behind what they’ve accomplished internally. At least.
So yes, the insiders very likely know a thing or two that the rest of us don’t.
>>ein0p+qK
This really doesn't follow. True AGI would be general, but it doesn't necessarily mean that it's smarter than people; especially the kind of people who work as top researchers for OpenAI.
>>int_19+zO
I don’t see why it wouldn’t be superhuman if there’s any intelligence at all. It already is superhuman at memory and paying attention, image recognition, languages, etc. Add cognition to that and humans basically become pets. Trouble is nobody has a foggiest clue on how to add cognition to any of this.