Kaarssteun
Kaarssteun t1_j8cn0uh wrote
Well, you kinda were asking for it imo. Internet searches dont usually start like this
Kaarssteun t1_j5kshqa wrote
Gary often raises valid criticism - the believability of which is completely drained when he posts some weird ass takes - Him heavily implying cynicism because of a fundamental limitation in LLMs, something he should be aware of
Kaarssteun t1_j3hwuzi wrote
Reply to Organic AI by Dramatic-Economy3399
AI needs a loss function - just like us humans need motivation. For us, this ranges from eating food, to having sex, to being happy because of something else - these must be defined in an AI much the same. Letting an empty neural network roam around will not achieve anything
Kaarssteun OP t1_j2d6qvk wrote
Reply to comment by chadbarrett in OpenAI might have shot themselves in the foot with ChatGPT by Kaarssteun
Remember, LLMs are prone to hallucination; it can't "find" anything per se, and is a pathological liar.
Kaarssteun OP t1_j29yyjh wrote
Reply to comment by Mementoroid in OpenAI might have shot themselves in the foot with ChatGPT by Kaarssteun
The prisoner is bailed out
Kaarssteun OP t1_j29curp wrote
Reply to comment by hauntedhivezzz in OpenAI might have shot themselves in the foot with ChatGPT by Kaarssteun
As i said, i know and love they work together closely, but that's not confirming chatgpt will be integrated into bing
Kaarssteun OP t1_j29cl0a wrote
Reply to comment by hauntedhivezzz in OpenAI might have shot themselves in the foot with ChatGPT by Kaarssteun
Isnt that just a rumor so far? I love that microsoft is working with openai so closely, but has that been confirmed?
Kaarssteun OP t1_j29bhnn wrote
Reply to comment by lloesche in OpenAI might have shot themselves in the foot with ChatGPT by Kaarssteun
I do think people would bat an eye if they started charging money - to the layperson, this feels like google, and google has been free forever.
Kaarssteun OP t1_j29a9ad wrote
Reply to comment by hauntedhivezzz in OpenAI might have shot themselves in the foot with ChatGPT by Kaarssteun
That's the thing - this going viral is costing them millions. There is no product for them to sell given people now expect this service to be free.
Kaarssteun t1_j293ctq wrote
Reply to comment by blah-blah-guy in the singularity is already a threat to our mental well-being by Ohigetjokes
- blah-blah-guy
Via: Reddit
Kaarssteun t1_j292qsy wrote
Reply to Revolutionary machine learning weather simulator by DeepMind & Google’s ML-Based "GraphCast" outperforms top global forecasting system. GraphCast can generate accurate 10-day forecasts at a resolution of 25 km in under 60 seconds. by vegita1022
Weather forecasting is one of those fields where I expected advances to be negligible due to two things: Sheer amount of time already spent on it, and the butterfly effect. Happy to see Deepmind doing their thing and proving me wrong again.
Kaarssteun t1_j25bl79 wrote
Reply to comment by Cryptizard in AI timelines: What do experts in artificial intelligence expect for the future? by kmtrp
Honestly an argument for us not being batshit crazy. 10% of scientists & well-informed people is a whole lot better than 0%
Kaarssteun t1_j1yxkx5 wrote
Reply to comment by Baron_Samedi_ in Considering the recent advancements in AI, is it possible to achieve full-dive in the next 5-10 years? by Burlito2
Im not saying it will break the physical laws per se - but it really might. Everything we know, we know with our human intelligence, which will be surpassed. A dog might think his master never runs out of food, that may be a "law" in his mental world, yet it is painfully obvious to us humans that it's wrong.
Kaarssteun t1_j1w28a8 wrote
Reply to comment by Baron_Samedi_ in Considering the recent advancements in AI, is it possible to achieve full-dive in the next 5-10 years? by Burlito2
ASI being superhuman by definition, it will find a way around those.
Kaarssteun t1_j1uvhga wrote
Reply to comment by ihateshadylandlords in Considering the recent advancements in AI, is it possible to achieve full-dive in the next 5-10 years? by Burlito2
FDVR is ASI + 3 months. I don't think we as humans are capable of the technical feat - especially before AI.
Kaarssteun t1_j18kwoj wrote
Reply to Google Declares “Code Red” over ChatGPT by maxtility
paywall
Kaarssteun t1_j10z3u9 wrote
Reply to comment by MyCuteData in To all you well-read and informed futurologists here: what is the future of gaming? by Verificus
Okay. Let us rephrase then. The deciding factor is when ASI arrives - capable of achieving feats us humans have little to no chance at achieving; FDVR being one of them. Hence, I predict FDVR arrives 2-3 months after ASI does.
Kaarssteun t1_j0udpg9 wrote
Reply to comment by civilrunner in Is progress towards AGI generally considered a hardware problem or a software problem? by Johns-schlong
Right, enslaving is subjective; but we want to make sure it enhances our lives rather than destroying it.
Kaarssteun t1_j0ucilx wrote
Reply to comment by civilrunner in Is progress towards AGI generally considered a hardware problem or a software problem? by Johns-schlong
It's not our goal to replicate a human brain; that's what making children is for. We are trying to replicate the brain's intellectual intelligence in a way that enslaving it would still be ethical.
Kaarssteun t1_j0uc0fc wrote
Reply to comment by PulsatingMonkey in Prediction: De-facto Pure AGI is going to be arriving next year. Pessimistically in 3 years. by Ace_Snowlight
??
Sam Altman thinks AGI will arrive sooner than people think, but will have a lesser, slower impact than most think at the same time.
Kaarssteun t1_j0s73ps wrote
Reply to Is progress towards AGI generally considered a hardware problem or a software problem? by Johns-schlong
100% a software problem. There is no guarantee, but the trends don't lie. Chances of AGI never arriving are... astronomically small.
Kaarssteun t1_izzm7l1 wrote
Reply to comment by Muffydabee in I don't want AI to do all our jobs for us by [deleted]
>what you're suggesting is infinite contentment and happiness
No. You clearly show you don't want that - so that's not your perfect world. If your perfect world contains misfortune and crime, you'll get that. In perfect doses, so that you are the happiest possible; even if your maximum sustainable happiness is relatively low. Seems like it.
Kaarssteun t1_izyoeqj wrote
Reply to comment by Muffydabee in I don't want AI to do all our jobs for us by [deleted]
Like i said, you will achieve perfection; even if your perfection is imperfection. If you dont desire a 24/7 opiate high, thats not your perfect world. Simple as.
Kaarssteun t1_izyewbn wrote
Reply to comment by Muffydabee in I don't want AI to do all our jobs for us by [deleted]
you think that now. Just wait until you're plugged into a custom FDVR experience tuned specifically to your taste, prickling the exact likes you've always had, scratching that itch you never even knew you had, and making you the happiest you could ever be - even if your perfection is imperfection.
Kaarssteun t1_jaa80vg wrote
Reply to Singularity claims its first victim: the anime industry by Ok_Sea_6214
u/sashinii already know youve been waiting for this