Recent comments in /f/singularity

fluffy_assassins t1_j9bo1io wrote

Yeah, exactly. I almost edited it to say something like that.

Also the Trinity of remote technologies, probably.

I imagine AI will always be cloud based because there's so much more efficient and dedicated competing per available. Quantum computing will probably also always be remote because of the cooling requirements.

Nuclear fusion? We already have it. Look up. Just, remote access to it.

2

RiotNrrd2001 t1_j9bmlb2 wrote

I personally couldn't care less if it's "intelligent" or not. My own concern is mainly whether what comes out of it is useful or not. Whether a conscious mind produced that output or whether it was the result of a complicated dart game, as far as I'm concerned is an interesting question. But a more important question is - at least for me - is what it produces useful? It's less academic, and somewhat more objective. I can't tell if it's conscious. I CAN tell whether it's properly summarized a paragraph I wrote into a particular format, or whether the list of ideas I asked it for are worth delving into. I can't evaluate its conscious state, or even its level of intelligence, but that doesn't mean I can't evaluate its behavior, and I have to say that in those areas where factual knowledge isn't as necessary (summarizing text, creating outlines, producing lists of ideas, etc.) it behaves usefully intelligent. Does that mean it IS intelligent? To an extent, to me at least, that may not even matter except as an academic thought.

I almost want to look at these systems from a Behavioral Psychology point of view, where internal states are simply discounted as irrelevant and external behavior is all that matters. I don't like applying that to people, but it does seem tempting to apply it to AIs.

ChatGPT is not a calculator, it's more like a young, well-educated but inexperienced intern who wants to do a good job, but who still makes mistakes. I understand that I have to check ChatGPTs work. I can work with that.

1

Pussycaptin t1_j9blkxg wrote

Makes sense to me. It’s the same effect behind journaling, people are judgey and cruel but you can feel safe writing and chat gpt also has logic which can be comforting to know it won’t randomly get emotional about a topic so that you can have calm consistency where most people can’t

1

Aggravating-Act-1092 t1_j9bk0x0 wrote

Reply to comment by prodoosh in What’s up with DeepMind? by BobbyWOWO

That’s a good point. There accounts for 2021 are here:

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/07386350/filing-history/MzM1NDYzODM1NmFkaXF6a2N4/document?format=pdf&download=0

That works out at just under 2 billion USD in 2021. Given their own and the industry trend we can probably assume 2022 is higher and 2023 will be higher still.

OAI gave no timeline over which their 10B injection will be spent over, but presumably more than 1 or 2 years. So these two are definitely in the same league.

2

Mortal-Region t1_j9bjuue wrote

Not only is work progressing, but it could best be described as a mad rush. IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Google, Amazon and others are all working on the problem, approaching it from slightly different angles. Anyone of them might report a breakthrough at any moment.

125

Frumpagumpus t1_j9bhttf wrote

inb4 this guy reads manna.

i think most intelligences will be virtual and humans that don't end up uploading themselves will be amish (or equivalent culture) and live on what is essentially equivalent to a modern day indian territory or historical re enactment farm.

you wont have to go anywhere to get your brain re wrote if you broke the rules.

1