Grazie Pete.
Un boomer
(che non corregge gli errori di battitura.)
Correggere gli errori di battitura nei prompt è un controsenso per un LLM che funziona sulle probabilità della prossima parola.
Complessa la parola intelligenza, eh!
Sono un genio!
L’avevo detto già anni fa per Siri e Alexa specializzate sulle materie scolastiche.
AI non arriverà mai a certe performance umane ma supererà l’umano in molte altre.
È tecnologia non intelligenza.
Genio è una battuta. 😎
Yann Lecun published the most heretical AI paper of the year.
He opens by arguing Magnus Carlsen isn't good at chess and only gets more unhinged from there.
The Turing Award winner and his co-authors dropped a paper demanding the AI industry abandon its biggest obsession, AGI.
Right now, everyone from Silicon Valley CEOs to politicians assumes AGI is the ultimate goal. A machine that can do everything a human can do.
LeCun argues that this entire concept is a biological illusion.
Humans do not possess "general" intelligence. We are highly specialized biological machines, tuned by evolution simply to survive in the physical world.
We only think our intelligence is "general" because we are completely blind to the millions of cognitive tasks we are incapable of comprehending.
Which brings us to the chess argument.
Magnus Carlsen is the greatest human chess player in history. But compared to a modern computer? He is fundamentally terrible.
Our belief that Carlsen is "good" at chess is pure human-centric bias. He isn't objectively good. He's just better than the rest of us, who are biologically awful at it.
LeCun says we need to stop building AI to mimic human generality.
Instead, he proposes a new North Star: SAI.
Superhuman Adaptable Intelligence.
Instead of trying to build a machine that mimics our flawed, biologically-limited brains, we need to embrace extreme specialization.
SAI is about the speed of adaptation.
It is an intelligence that can learn to exceed humans at any specific, economically important task.
More importantly, it is designed to fill the vast skill gaps where humans are fundamentally incapable.
Things like managing global energy grids in real-time. Or predicting complex molecular structures.
The entire AI industry is obsessed with building a digital reflection in our own image.
LeCun's paper is a brutal wake-up call.
Se vi siete impegnati sulla pallina da golf ecco un mio classico:
“Un mattone pesa 1 kg più mezzo mattone.
Quanto pesa un mattone?”
A presto.
(Letto tanto di @nntaleb post compresi. Geniale)
Daniel Kahneman - the psychologist who won a Nobel in economics - spent his life proving one thing: your confidence is lying to you
A bat and a ball cost $1.10. The bat costs $1 more than the ball. The answer "10 cents" jumps to mind instantly. It's wrong (it's 5 cents) - and ~50% of students at Harvard, MIT and Princeton say it without checking.
That gap is his whole point: the fast, intuitive mind builds a clean story from almost nothing, and the feeling of certainty has nothing to do with being right.
"Confidence is a feeling, not a judgment."
"Stock pickers can't develop intuition - there isn't enough regularity for it to form."
"You can build a very coherent story out of very little information."
~45 min, free. how your mind fools you - from a man who studied it for 50 years ↓
@aledenicola@Curini Io però non capisco [problema mio] ma chi si smarca si costruisce il suo gruppo distinguendo nome, programma, possibili alleanze, ecc.
E siamo all’ennesima ipotesi [distinta] in ambito liberale, un’area continuamente in cerca di un collante.
Bonne chance.
E chi sono io per contraddire Hassabis? Ma ci sono due concetti che non tornano:
1. Gratis
2. Leva infinita.
In più chi detta le leggi è chi detiene la tecnologia, i filosofi non hanno guidato neanche Atene.
#STEM a chi? 😎
Demis Hassabis just handed the future of civilization to the philosophers.
Not more engineers. Not more compute. Not more code.
A direct call to arms for the humanities.
Hassabis: “It’s very urgent that we really think about the second-order consequences. Many of you in the humanities subjects, it’s now your time in my opinion.”
The CEO of Google DeepMind. The man further down the road of artificial intelligence than almost anyone alive.
And he’s saying the next chapter doesn’t belong to him.
He laid out the exact sequence of what comes next.
First, get the technology right.
Then, rewrite the economics.
Then, face the philosophical questions about the human condition.
That third layer is where everything changes.
Because we’ve spent all of recorded history defining ourselves by what we can do. Think. Build. Solve. Create.
Intelligence was the currency. The differentiator. The thing that separated us from everything else on this planet.
And we’re about to make it abundant.
When the thing you built your entire identity around becomes something a machine does better, faster, and for free…
You don’t have a technology problem.
You have a mirror.
And the mirror is asking one question.
What are you without the doing?
Most people look at that question and see obsolescence.
Hassabis sees elevation.
Hassabis: “I’m very optimistic that we’re gonna get this right. I’m a big believer in human ingenuity, especially when the pressure’s on.”
This is not a warning about the end of the world.
It’s an invitation to build a better one.
For a century, society pushed the humanities to the margins. We prioritized the mechanics of survival over the philosophy of living.
That era is over.
When artificial intelligence automates the mechanics of survival, philosophy ceases to be a theoretical luxury.
It becomes the most critical applied science on Earth.
Algorithms cannot calculate what constitutes a virtuous life. Code cannot assign meaning.
The technologists are about to hand us infinite leverage. But infinite leverage without human direction is just chaos.
Hassabis: “Humanity has always figured it out when the chips are down. And they are now.”
The chips are down.
But that’s exactly where this species does its best work.
We spent ten thousand years building a machine that could lift the burden of basic survival.
We succeeded.
Now we finally get to figure out what it actually means to be alive.
@eleonora_aloise Che vuol dire connivenza? Con chi ama il tennis? Con chi ha buon gusto? Con chi sa riconoscere pregi e difetti? Con chi è disumanamente ironicamente tifoso?
W i conniventi!