BigMuffin69 @awful.systems Hi, I'm Eric and I work at a big chip company making chips and such! I do math for a job, but it's cold hard stochastic optimization that makes people who know names like Tychonoff and Sylow weep.
My pfp is Hank Azaria in Heat, but you already knew that.
Thank you. My wife is deathly allergic to shrimp, and I live by the motto
'If they send one of your loved ones to the emergency room, you send 10 of theirs to the deep fryer. '
Shared this on tamer social media site and a friend commented:
"That's nonsense. The largest charities in the country are Feeding America, Good 360, St. Jude's Children's Research Hospital, United Way, Direct Relief, Salvation Army, Habitat for Humanity etc. etc. Now these may not satisfy the EA criteria of absolutely maximizing bang for the buck, but they are certainly mostly doing worthwhile things, as anyone counts that. Just the top 12 on this list amount to more than the total arts giving. The top arts organization on this list is #58, the Metropolitan Museum, with an income of $347M."
Wild. Just the mention of "the moon" and it starts playing in my head. This place is an info hazard.
A nice exponential curve depicting the infinite future lives saved by whacking a ceo
Pat walking into the last board meeting
Same reaction. I don't see how you can stop at it's immoral for me to not breed with the Übermensch when the clear logical end is it's immoral for me to breed entirely. As a childless person, do I get to go to EA meet ups and wag my fingers at them for not being moral now?
I will find someone who I consider better than me in relevant ways, and have them provide the genetic material. I think that it would be immoral not to, and that it is impossible not to think this way after thinking seriously about it.
Corporate needs you to find the difference between this^ and our local cult leader is the sun god reborn, it's every woman's duty to carry his seed. It is immoral to deny his divine will.
I remember when several months (a year ago?) when the news got out that gpt-3.5-turbo-papillion-grumpalumpgus could play chess around ~1600 elo. I was skeptical the apparent skill wasn't just a hacked-on patch to stop folks from clowning on their models on xitter. Like if an LLM had just read the instructions of chess and started playing like a competent player, that would be genuinely impressive. But if what happened is they generated 10^12 synthetic games of chess played by stonk fish and used that to train the model- that ain't an emergent ability, that's just brute forcing chess. The fact that larger, open-source models that perform better on other benchmarks, still flail at chess is just a glaring red flag that something funky was going on w/ gpt-3.5-turbo-instruct to drive home the "eMeRgEnCe" narrative. I'd bet decent odds if you played with modified rules, (knights move a one space longer L shape, you cannot move a pawn 2 moves after it last moved, etc), gpt-3.5 would fuckin suck.
Edit: the author asks "why skill go down tho" on later models. Like isn't it obvious? At that moment of time, chess skills weren't a priority so the trillions of synthetic games weren't included in the training? Like this isn't that big of a mystery...? It's not like other NN haven't been trained to play chess...
If they do press conferences this time around, ever question should just be "does Elon approve of decision ____ ?" Will drive Trump fkn insane.
I voted for Liz in 2020 :( instead they gave me diamond joe
To grasp how disastrously an apparently altruistic movement has run off course, consider that the value of organizations that provide healthy vegan food within their underserved communities are ignored as an area of funding because EA metrics can’t measure their “effectiveness.” Or how covering the costs of caring for survivors of industrial animal farming in sanctuaries is seen as a bad use of funds. Or how funding an “effective” organization’s expansion into another country encourages colonialist interventions that impose elite institutional structures and sideline community groups whose local histories and situated knowledges are invaluable guides to meaningful action.
Nice. Kind of reminds me of a segment in Ken Burns' Vietnam documentary where to eradicate the Viet Kong, American military intelligence organizations became obsessed with body counts as a measure of 'winning' the war, so then the effect on the ground became shooting civs so we can count more bodies. The metric you use as a proxy for doing good (I've donated x dollars to combat homelessness while working for blackrock :)) isn't aligned with your desired outcome.
Hey, wait a minute, were EAs the misaligned entity all along??
⢀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠘⣿⣿⡟⠲⢤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠈⢿⡇⠀⠀⠈⠑⠦⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⠴⢲⣾⣿⣿⠃ ⠀⠀⠈⢿⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠓⢤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⡤⠖⠚⠉⠀⠀⢸⣿⡿⠃⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠈⢧⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠦⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⡤⠖⠋⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣸⡟⠁⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠳⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠒⠒⠛⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠑⠋⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣰⠏⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⢦⡀⠀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡴⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⣶⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠰⣀⣀⠴⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣰⠁⠀⠀⠀⣠⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣤⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠹⣇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢠⠃⠀⠀⠀⢸⣀⣽⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣧⣨⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡞⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⠿⠛⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠛⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢹⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢰⢃⡤⠖⠒⢦⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠛⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⠤⠤⢤⡀⠀⠀⢧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⢸⡀⠀⠀⢀⡗⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⠤⠤⢤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⡁⠀⠀⠀⣹⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⡀⠙⠒⠒⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢺⡀⠀⠀⠀⢹⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠲⠴⠚⠁⠀⠀⠸⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢷⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠦⠤⠴⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢳⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠂⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠾⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠦⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠼⠇⠀⠀⠀
The American electorate has just covered itself with gasoline because eggs cost 2 dollars more. Come January they strike the match. gg. HATE. LET ME TELL YOU HOW MUCH I'VE COME TO HATE YOU SINCE NOVEMBER 5TH. My only consolation is that I'll hopefully get to watch some of the Magas/non voters/vote-your-conscience peeps suffer before the end. But Ol musky and peter thiel will be in their gilded bunkers while the fires consume us all.
I know it's Halloween, but this popped up in my feed and was too spooky even for me 😱
As a side note, what are peoples feelings about Wolfram? Smart dude for sho, but some of the shit he says just comes across as straight up pseudoscientific gobbledygook. But can he out guru Big Yud in a 1v1 on Final Destination (fox only, no items) ? 🤔
Actual message I got while renewing my insurance plan last night. Thank you for adding a shitty chat bot which will give me false information about my life and death decisions, bravo.
Babe wake up, new missing email scandal just dropped
Bless. You know I'm here for the hot goss.
OAI employees channel the spirit of Marvin Minsky
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. 🙂
Top clowns all agree their balloon animals are slightly sentient
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>