Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

AI_Enjoyer87 t1_iwgcone wrote

Disagree with your timeline. Think we will have a form of proto-AGI in a year or two. Then literally everything else shortly after. Probably AGI by 2025 if we are lucky. As soon as we get proto-AGI we will probably get advanced BCI's and full dive vr. Once we get that I think the next 30 years will be condensed into the next 5 or so. Ik it's a bullish timeline but I believe we are at the knee curve of exponential growth.

27

userbrn1 t1_iwhdrz2 wrote

> As soon as we get proto-AGI we will probably get advanced BCI's and full dive vr.

I think that's quite the leap. "full dive" vr would require us to essentially have completely mastered neural encoding both from a theoretical perspective (we're not even close) and from a practical perspective (we're not even close to being close).

It's important to realize that decoding neural signals (brain computer interface) is profoundly different than encoding neural signals (full dive vr). We're currently getting better at neural decoding, such as turning brain signals into limb movements and controlling virtual keyboard and pong paddles.

As far as I know we have virtually no success in artificially simulating sensory stimuli input. We aren't able to plug something into your brain and make you feel touch sensations, or make you clearly see images. We're not even remotely close to that. If we get even a small fraction of the way there the first thing we'd do is create prosthetic eyes, ears, skin, etc. Even the best tech today with cochlear implants requires an intact nerve to take the signal into the brain to get interpreted; we are not at the stage where we can directly encode auditory stimuli into the brain.

17

nblack88 t1_iwhkuel wrote

I tend to follow John Carmack's opinion on this: Having AGI doesn't actually herald instantaneous changes in our infrastructure or daily lives. It will take time to implement these advances, and build out the framework that AGI is incorporated into. The AI may be capable, but humans take time to allocate capital, achieve regulatory compliance, and execute those advances. It's coming, faster than we realize. But there is no magic bullet for deployment.

13

Danger-Dom t1_iwzilm1 wrote

I think it depends on how well the AGI can optimize itself. If the AGI realizes we're doing AGI 10(00)x less efficient than is possible, deployment timeline will increase.

1

nblack88 t1_iwzjf97 wrote

An increase is possible, and if all goes well, I expect it. It will still take time, unless we've dramatically increased the efficiency, scaling, and production of our various "hard" networks: Transportation, manufacturing, distribution, et al.

I hope by the time we have AGI and are ready to implement it in some/most aspects of society, we'll have these increases to facilitate the improvement.

1

Danger-Dom t1_ix0zqpj wrote

Yeah I'm just talking about purely algorithmic improvements. So if we create an AGI on the worlds largest supercomputer. If it codes itself up 10x more efficient. Now there's 100s of computers that would be able to deploy the new AGI, and we're off to the races.

Unless, of course, it can't find improvements like that and then yeah you're right we'll have to wait around to build more supercomputers and make faster chips.

But overall I think still with the former situation it'd be a couple years before we started seeing large civilization wide gains from the AI and it's progeny. Not like a next day thing as people seem to think. But not 10 years either.

1

Evil_Patriarch t1_iwgq2l8 wrote

I hope you're right but all of my optimism for tech advancement has been destroyed over the past couple decades

10

z0rm OP t1_iwgf9l8 wrote

This is my optimistic timeline. We obviously won't have most of these before 2030. These things take time, even if we had an ASI it would take years and years.

3

ActuaryGlittering16 t1_iwhgzti wrote

No way. The regulatory/political issues alone would kill this bullish timeline. Flying cars and nanobots in the body and household robots and a literal base on Mars in 5 years? Absolutely not.

I think OP’s conservative timeline is much more likely than this one.

2

tedd321 t1_iwhmney wrote

Politics is the bottleneck. If you vote for legislation that focuses on science then you get singularity. If you vote for humans who are ‘afraid of change’ or ones who want to maintain the status quo, you will get nothing.

It’s really simple

0

ActuaryGlittering16 t1_iwiekdd wrote

I don’t think the politicians on either side here in America want anything to do with this technology. The left views it as a few privileged elites in the tech world playing god. The Christian right views it as the end of times.

3

tedd321 t1_iwjy2f8 wrote

Which future is closer to the truth

1

idranh t1_iwi1y4c wrote

I really hope you're right. OP does make a good point though, that even if we have AGI wouldn't the real-world application of its solutions take years?

2