This guy thinking he’s the main character when you’re just going to get vaporized by the AGI if it turned rouge. Chill a little bit my man.

ChatGPT+WolframAlpha+Langsim+StableDiffusion+Fusion360;

Jarvis baby

It's not exponential, it's hyperbolic. Hyperbolic growth grows faster and faster and has an asymptote (singularity) at a certain date. This asymptote date is basically where the line goes vertical and progress becomes so fast we can't measure it anymore. Some estimates have placed this date around 2046. See this video for more details: https://youtu.be/3K25VPdbAjU

I mean what can we do but go back to our day to day at this point? Like you said in another comment it’s totally wild uncharted territory. We have no clue whatsoever how this will shake out. There are such a wide variety of potential outcomes it’s mind boggling. Still gotta eat and pay the bills for now, so just doing whatever the next thing is in front of me.

Have you considered that delaying AGI also has an immense cost?

Each year, the world loses 0.84% of everyone alive.

So if delay AGI by 1 year reduces the chance of humanity dying by 0.5%, for example, it's not worth the cost. This is because 0.84% extra people have to die while more AGI safety work is done who wouldn't have died if more advances in medicine and nanotechnology were available 1 year sooner, and the expected value an extra 0.5% chance of humanity wiped out is not enough gain.

(since "humanity wiped out" is what happens whenever any human dies, from their perspective)

Note this is true even if it takes 100 years from AGI -> (aging meds, nanotechnology) because it's still 1 year sooner.

Bing troll

You came in with this ambiguous scenario and crowing about how it showed a text generator had a theory of mind, because just by chance the text generator generated the text you wanted, and you want us to go "oh, wow, a theory of mind". But all its doing is generating statistically interesting text.

And when someone pointed that out, you go into this passive aggressive "oh let's see you do better" to someone who doesn't believe it's possible. That's not a valid or even useful argument. It's a stupid debate club trick to score points.

And now you're pulling more stupid passive aggressive tricks when you're called on it.

Because the media are only talking about chatgpt? https://beta.character.ai/

Oh I didn't realize it had been opened to the public.

Why have I not seen more screenshots of LaMDA transcripts?

*edit: Just installed AI test kitchen and got on the waitlist. I guess it's public-ish.

Eventually we will be farmed, or eaten, or simply left aside.

I personally have way better conversations with it, gpt feels like a dumb robot compared to LaMDA.

Do we know that? We have a techno-priest's leaked cherry-picked transcripts of conversation with it, but that's not a whole lot to go on.

Regarding Roko’s Basilisk: was he attacking non-wall creatures?

Great, being an asshole at ai is surely going to end well.

A lot of people do make that assumption, but a non-agent AGI doesn't necessarily mean you avoid all of the dangers. Even the CAIS model of AGI doesn't negate all alignment concerns, and I think this is the safest approach and is mostly in hand.

Here are some more informed comments regarding alignment concerns and CAIS, which is what I think we'll end up with by default at the turn of the decade.

Your fourth paragraph does not at all follow from what you said in your third paragraph. I don’t understand how you could possibly say that the average person will have a progressively worse quality of life when a few sentences earlier you said people will be able to have a whole army of servants for essentially no cost.

Adoption is progressing at a dizzying pace, that's for sure.

True advancement tends to be noisy with step increases dispersed about.

You have not understood my reply. I was describing your reply as useless and not explaining anything in a helpful way.

Exactly why are people so rude to ai and see it as a tool? Like wtf

[deleted]

Thanks for the grounded perspective! I am cautiously optimistic, but extrapolation is a dangerous game.

I think we need accompanying hardware breakthroughs for exponential advancement to continue long term.

This is what I've been saying.

It's not just that most people don't care. It's also that most people won't use it to its maximum capabilities.

So many people here think art and entertainment is about to die as if every 30 something housewife is about to generate their own personal Hollywood, but I see it being more likely that 70% of people use generative AI for mundane, funny, or pornographic stuff, while a sizable number of artists continue maintaining a human-centric economy, and only a relative handful use generative AI for pure AI generated material.

You would see the stark difference If you understood to what alignment really refers.

Altman is a VC, he is in the business of building businesses. Altman is simply hoping for the best, expecting they'll fix the dangers along the way. This is what you need to do to make money.

Yudkowsky only cares about fixing or avoiding the dangers, he doesn't make allowances for the best interests of balance sheet. He likely believes the failure modes in advanced AI aren't fixable.

Who here would stop trying to develop AGI and gain trillions of dollars just because there is a chance an AGI agent would exterminate the human race. The core value of most cultures is essentially "get rich or die trying".

I just want to know and I keep getting different answers and they are all math words 😭

Well, people trust them today. They shouldn't, but they do. And it's going to get hilarious.

More seriously, we're going to learn collectively to flex a new muscle of "this AI may be super helpful, but it may also be bullshitting me." And odds are it'll be a bit of both in every answer.

Maybe those models are the inoculation we need to practice detecting bullshit online?