I imagine the notion of self will be eliminated. In the bad outcome, the robot overlords have no use for us. In the better outcome, your circumstances will be so grossly changed that whatever there is of "you" that's left over will be unrecognizable as such. I don't imagine a true continuity as plausible.

In the more neutral outcome, we become pets in a zoo, not ascended transhumanistic beings.

I guess the “end of human civilization” doesn’t really matter to me as long as my consciousness still exists in some form. Since I already think of myself as a prospective posthuman, I don’t really perceive any more loss in that scenario than the “loss” involved in going from a child to an adult.

It was originally postulated as a doomsday scenario. It's certainly an event that would mark the end of civilization as we know it, aka, a doomsday.

https://edoras.sdsu.edu/~vinge/misc/singularity.html

The abstract reads:

> Within thirty years, we will have the technological means to create superhuman intelligence. Shortly after, the human era will be ended.

>Is such progress avoidable? If not to be avoided, can events be guided so that we may survive? These questions are investigated. Some possible answers (and some further dangers) are presented.

(Interestingly, the essay was written in 1983. Vernor Vinge was off by his prediction by at least 10 years, probably 20 years.)

It isn’t inherently a doomsday scenario though, assuming humans as individual beings will survive and simply ascend into a different and more advanced form of life.

Pretty much. It's also that those math wizards may be smarter than current AI but they often duplicate work. And it's an iterative process - AI starts with what we know, tries some things very rapidly. A few hours later it has the results and tries some more things based on that and so on.

Those math wizards need to publish and then read what others published. Even with rapid publishing like Deepmind does to a blog - they do this because academic publications take too long - it's a few months between cycles.

We got 100b to spare on this. More than that. Might as well use it. Once we find working AGI we can work on power efficiency.

How do you compare it to Perplexity? I've bounced back and forth and can't decide which is better, they seem nearly the same to me

It´s ironical, but i am proud of this sub for being so optimistic/realistic.

Heh.

A sub that's literally about a doomsday scenario (from the perspective of humanity) is worried because it doesn't want to get all cynical.

LLMs seem to be a top-down "reverse pipeline" method, form the intelligence from the interconnections of peoples intelligence through language.

it seems that jc is advocating more a classic bottom-up approach. ie create an artificial insect then mouse type brain and build up small modules.

the thing that stands out here is that it all seems to be with classical computer hardware and not some radical new hardware.

Wen singularity ☕️🗿

Microsoft is a tech company with a giant R & D department. If you willingly hand over data, of course they will use it, provided you bring something interesting to the table.

They can ask ChatGTP too what people ask it all the time.

Never forget the OGs

That's why you build a trust relationship with your clients and providers. Yes, that's right: you promise to keep their secrets and they trust you with them.

Microsoft already manages many other companies' data in their cloud, and they don't take it all for themselves and use it with impunity.

Same for the ChatGPT conversations. This will probably require a special contractual agreement between the parties, like a paid corporate version, but it's feasible.

I'll pile on a prediction, this is what finally introduces centralized computing into the home the same way we have central air conditioners.

You can put in a frame or rack, install blades as needed, modular as lightbulbs.

Devices can be just screens and batteries with the video being piped down over existing Wifi or whenever, I have 6E at my home and it connects at 2.4Gbps - runs Parsec perfectly.

Your home core will run your AI with whatever hw modules you can stuff into it, and it is charged with protecting your information, it knows how to expand itself if you can provide it more compute.

For workloads the AI needs to outsource, services will agree to legally guarantee that when their AI is given access to your private copy of an S3 bucket of relevant personal information that it will provide an answer and will keep none of your data - only keeping the solution steps to help other users.

Users in local nets can offer spare encrypted containerized capacity that your neighbor's AI can rent for a nominal automated fee, likely paid for by selling some solar credits back to the grid automatically, lowering the load on centralized servers - to run a data set and return with the answer and shut down the container and wipe it - or return logs to the originators system.

When you pull the people out, you remove the temptation of user indiscretion, when it comes to things like legal contracts and business dealings believe me you want the most dispassionate law-abiding robot you can get.

Just watch out for the ones they give guns, because that's one of those times where that human discretion can go both positive or negative depending upon the situation.

That could be true, but you could also end up in a situation where the hardware running the primary sim continues to get upgraded and expanded, which increases its capacity to hold more information (that is, the society—and its own simulations—that its simulating). Computation of These should get cheaper and cheaper too. Just another thought.

and we need this to cut that cost from $100bn to potato because biology runs on potato hardware, not a $100bn super computer. only if these pseudonerds realized it in the AI industry, we'd be expediting our search for more optimally converging networks.

we just need a team of a few math wizards to come up with better algorithms for training, matrix multiplications and whatever np problems are there in meta learning.. oh wait! we can just throw all our data into current AI and they will come up with the algorithms!!

this is how AGI will be achieved, there is no other way because humans don't get too many emmy noethers to come up with some new ways to do math. humans are busy with their short life and various indulgence.

and then, the singularity; or at least we can hope for it sooner with more eyes watching and more minds working

I personally more look forward to Microsoft incorporating generative AI into Microsoft office. It could be awesome for Word, Powerpoint, Excel, Outlook, Teams, etc.. Will be curious if they could even compete with Adobe with a generative AI illustrator and graphic editor added to the office suite.

I suspect google will also incorporate generative AI into google docs, but office is still far more powerful today and more commonly used.

Search will be neat, though need models to be able determine fact from fiction and not make up information it doesn't definitively "know" before its really useful. Curious how long it will take to do that.

Seems like that should be the case as well since the brain doesn't "run on a lot of code" as far as we understand.

With growing momentum, it should be put to good use.

Technological trends are going to be irreversible. So its important to have a conversation as to where we want to head as a society. In the most organized, rational, manner.

Not just in this subreddit either. All the other related ones should get together in a sort of techno-fixer unity. For the promotion of science & technical solutions in our ever evolving society.

Clearly we'll have 84 quadrillions subscribers by 2030!!!

[deleted]

I think wide adoption of humanoid robots for personal use will be a post singularity trend. They would need to be extremely useful and reliable for a low price, or you may as well do the work yourself or hire a maid. I can see people being creeped out by them as well.