I’ve sort of lost interest in AGI. It was always an interest because of all the cool things I imagined it would be able to do, but here we are now without AGI but with so many of the cool things I was imagining. So I care less if it's AGI or not. It’s extremely useful none the less. And as models get better and better and as tools improve we’ll see more and more value added to society even if it isn’t AGI.
I have developed ethical qualms about AGI. We end up either enslaving an intelligence, breeding it into submission, or end up with a powerful adversary.
I was kind of hoping he would go on to speculate on what those breakthroughs might be, but the article doesn't go into any more detail. If someone like him doesn't have some next steps in mind, that doesn't bode well for AGI happening any time soon.
Current AI will get better in the sense that it can solve phd level questions, but still does have the type of true intelligence a toddler has. There is some sort of spark missing there
I’ve sort of lost interest in AGI. It was always an interest because of all the cool things I imagined it would be able to do, but here we are now without AGI but with so many of the cool things I was imagining. So I care less if it's AGI or not. It’s extremely useful none the less. And as models get better and better and as tools improve we’ll see more and more value added to society even if it isn’t AGI.
I have developed ethical qualms about AGI. We end up either enslaving an intelligence, breeding it into submission, or end up with a powerful adversary.
I was kind of hoping he would go on to speculate on what those breakthroughs might be, but the article doesn't go into any more detail. If someone like him doesn't have some next steps in mind, that doesn't bode well for AGI happening any time soon.
It took like 60 years for the first big breakthrough, we need a handful.. see you in 300 years, if it’s linear
That to me feels intuitively right.
Current AI will get better in the sense that it can solve phd level questions, but still does have the type of true intelligence a toddler has. There is some sort of spark missing there
Just like fusion. But without the strong theoretical underpinnings so .. worse than fusion.
"Breakthrough" is the whiteboard covered in maths and an empty box labelled "magic here"
Humanity has known for decades that there's no known metal that will survive fusion's neutron output. They all turn into radioactive garbage.
Until we solve that, why bother with fusion?