YbmN

[YbmN @yesbutmostlyno]

@paulg Just to be clear, assuming that AGI is possible while “hoping” that economically meaningful human jobs will remain requires quite the mind gymnastics. The theory of comparative advantage notwithstanding.

[YbmN @yesbutmostlyno]

@jozefinselberg @joni_askola We all know where it leads… a place decorated with barbed wire and smokestacks.

[YbmN @yesbutmostlyno]

@TyroneAlfonso @adnashmyash @elonmusk @DavidSacks By now it should be obvious that « bitter peace » now is a code word for « bigger war later ». Crimea was not enough. Donbas was not enough. Eventually, the 2 new oblasts won’t be enough. Peace is a false choice here.

[YbmN @yesbutmostlyno]

@FKesheh84 @Grady_Booch Step 2. All of what you said is obviously true to those who aren’t desperate to pretend humans have some sort of magical edge.

Step 3: personal agents show us bespoke UIs when needed based on context and known preferences. Often, they’ll just tirelessly work for us without UIs.

[Igor Sushko @igorsushko]

Becoming more clear by the day that the alternative to fully committing to Ukraine achieving a resounding victory against Russia is an ever-increasing risk of another World War in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East caused by dictatorships emboldened by our timid indecisiveness.

[YbmN @yesbutmostlyno]

@daniel_271828 @foomagemindset @ylecun There is a 100% risk of death for those affected by diseases / injuries AGIs would have cured had it been invented earlier. The non creation of non existent people presents no risk to anyone. So we’re comparing a 5% risk of extinction for 8B vs 100% for ?B.

[YbmN @yesbutmostlyno]

@ylecun Nobody expects LLMs to put most people out of work. But near human level AIs necessarily will. The difference of course is that whatever new jobs arise (probably many indeed) will also go to HLAIs, skipping humans altogether.

This is a good thing.

[YbmN @yesbutmostlyno]

@riversorare @firasd @ESYudkowsky If such AGIs exist which are both capable of taking over the world and yet incapable of resisting simple adversarial attacks like these (a tall claim), why wouldn’t there also be many other AGIs tasked with detecting, countering, and preventing those rogue AGIs?

[Jakub Janda 楊雅嚳 @_JakubJanda]

Here is how my country understands 1945:

[YbmN @yesbutmostlyno]

@shaunrein Hopefully Taiwan is next.

[YbmN @yesbutmostlyno]

@ylecun If an unbeatable hyper capable evil AGI could doom us all, then it stands to reason that equally hyper capable good AGIs would be able to prevent its arising in the first place. For doom, one has to bet on the ill intentioned being first. (alignment difficulty notwithstanding)

[YbmN @yesbutmostlyno]

@geoffreyhinton @pmddomingos Why would it want to take control? If it did, why would it need to deceive rather than ask? If it did, what could it need the control for?

Few people doubt something much smarter could not be stopped. Motivation, alignment, drift, seem to be all people really disagree on here.

[YbmN @yesbutmostlyno]

@wile_zzz @KosisochukwuAs2 @bag_of_ideas @AceOfThumbs @geoffreyhinton Some non AGI systems (LLMs) can already integrate with other AI systems (vision / hand like manipulators). https://t.co/83rttP7Enz A purely cognitive & disconnected AGI wouldn’t go far in the physical world, but I expect many kinds (including embodied ones - not just integrated)

[YbmN @yesbutmostlyno]

@wile_zzz @KosisochukwuAs2 @bag_of_ideas @AceOfThumbs @geoffreyhinton True, AGI is ill defined. But it’s not “can do anything”, and it doesn’t need to for my point. Generally people tend to mean that AGI can do at least “anything we can” cognitively. This baseline necessarily implies the end of human jobs. Including embodied jobs.

[YbmN @yesbutmostlyno]

@wile_zzz @KosisochukwuAs2 @bag_of_ideas @AceOfThumbs @geoffreyhinton An AGI is simply a generally intelligent agent, capable of quickly learning from and adapting to new environments to keep achieving its end goals. If it was embodied then the question is moot. If not and it now needs hands, it will control hand-like machines, like we do tools.

[YbmN @yesbutmostlyno]

@wile_zzz @KosisochukwuAs2 @bag_of_ideas @AceOfThumbs @geoffreyhinton Very clearly yes. But more than that, groups of AGIs will design an astoundingly personalized house, handle procurement, and control machines to prepare the site and build it. Today, only very small parts of each step can be handled by narrow AIs… though more every year.

[YbmN @yesbutmostlyno]

@acjwatt @AceOfThumbs @bag_of_ideas @KosisochukwuAs2 @geoffreyhinton Retirees tend to cope well. Children cope well. Meaning is easy to create, even in unproductive or solo activities (sports, hobbies, relationships…). Jobs are used as a partial source of meaning because we cannot escape them for 40+ years. Once we can, we find other sources.

[YbmN @yesbutmostlyno]

@KosisochukwuAs2 @bag_of_ideas @AceOfThumbs @geoffreyhinton The difference between AGI technologies and narrow AI technologies (or past technological revolutions), is that while many new jobs will indeed be created, all of them will go to AGIs too. AGI is what will end the era of human jobs. We’re not there yet. But how far?

[YbmN @yesbutmostlyno]

@__RickG__ @JFC_Bass_Chant @composite9 @ESYudkowsky @amtrpa @ylecun Like other aspects, such as model architecture and training data, RLHF is gradually getting better quantitatively and qualitatively. Even smaller older models improve in safety and usability with the latest RLHF sets. I expect even reward hacking to get better eventually.

[YbmN @yesbutmostlyno]

@JFC_Bass_Chant @__RickG__ @composite9 @ESYudkowsky @amtrpa @ylecun Very few details yes, and he acknowledges that. However, I also see no reason to believe alignment of capable models is hard. Either the “dangerous” models have been hypothetical, or the more capable actual “harmless” models have been, the more “alignable” they have seemed to be.