Re: Proto-AGI/First Generation AGI News and Discussions
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2021 11:54 pm
We may be very close to the rise of the first proto-AGIs alright.
Looking back at this graphic made by Ray Kurzweil, surely people have noticed that we've passed through everything up to mouse brains and yet there's been no generally-intelligent AIs as of yet
Mother Jones' graphic also represents just how powerful computers have become:
Well, if we've been able to develop insect-level AI since the 1980s-1990s, why haven't we? The answer is not rooted in hardware but rather software.
I've been thinking about this lately: GANs and transformers have unexpected flashes of intelligence. I wouldn't call them intelligences at all, but it takes some amount of abstraction to learn that water reflects and maintain this even in generated images that are not overfitted. And GPT-2 and GPT-3 clearly operate on some level like a human, most notably when it comes to mathematical abilities:
THE OBLIGATORY GPT-3 POST
But again, only the delusional, religious, and seriously over-optimistic would call GPT-3 an AGI. And yes, they have! I just saw someone recently who was aggressively, combatively serious in his/her dedication that GPT-3 was an AGI.
It isn't. But could it still be somewhere along the spectrum of biological intelligence if it were coalesced into a more effective form? To be conservative, could it be as generally-intelligent as an insect? Insects can't speak English or do math and a language model clearly isn't meant to replicate insectoid intelligence, so clearly we're dealing with two wholly different kinds of architecture. Still, it's fascinating to consider that training a general-knowledge model on purely insect experiences may produce something indistinguishable from an insect. It's possible to do something like this, but there's no real reason to do it other than to prove it's done, and I doubt certain groups would want to waste compute just to make a computer think it's a dragonfly. Still, it'll be something if this were confirmed to be feasible and would definitely give us the best proof yet that we're on the right track.
Looking back at this graphic made by Ray Kurzweil, surely people have noticed that we've passed through everything up to mouse brains and yet there's been no generally-intelligent AIs as of yet
Mother Jones' graphic also represents just how powerful computers have become:
Well, if we've been able to develop insect-level AI since the 1980s-1990s, why haven't we? The answer is not rooted in hardware but rather software.
I've been thinking about this lately: GANs and transformers have unexpected flashes of intelligence. I wouldn't call them intelligences at all, but it takes some amount of abstraction to learn that water reflects and maintain this even in generated images that are not overfitted. And GPT-2 and GPT-3 clearly operate on some level like a human, most notably when it comes to mathematical abilities:
THE OBLIGATORY GPT-3 POST
But again, only the delusional, religious, and seriously over-optimistic would call GPT-3 an AGI. And yes, they have! I just saw someone recently who was aggressively, combatively serious in his/her dedication that GPT-3 was an AGI.
It isn't. But could it still be somewhere along the spectrum of biological intelligence if it were coalesced into a more effective form? To be conservative, could it be as generally-intelligent as an insect? Insects can't speak English or do math and a language model clearly isn't meant to replicate insectoid intelligence, so clearly we're dealing with two wholly different kinds of architecture. Still, it's fascinating to consider that training a general-knowledge model on purely insect experiences may produce something indistinguishable from an insect. It's possible to do something like this, but there's no real reason to do it other than to prove it's done, and I doubt certain groups would want to waste compute just to make a computer think it's a dragonfly. Still, it'll be something if this were confirmed to be feasible and would definitely give us the best proof yet that we're on the right track.