Are we not heading towards AGI then?
Sibbo@sopuli.xyz 1 week ago
the race toward AGI
lol
Free_Opinions@feddit.uk 1 week ago
jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 1 week ago
In the same way that if you start digging a hole in northwestern Spain you are heading towards New Zealand.
Free_Opinions@feddit.uk 1 week ago
The difference here is that you’re never going to reach New Zealand that way but incremental improvements in AI will eventually get you to AGI*
*Unless intelligence is substrate independent and cannot be replicated in silica or that we destroy ourselves before we get thereThorry84@feddit.nl 1 week ago
It’s very easy with an incremental improvement tactic to get stuck in a local maximum. You’ve then hit a dead end, every available option leads to a degredation and thus isn’t viable. It isn’t a sure thing incremental improvements lead to the desired outcome.
jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 1 week ago
AI in general yes. LLMs in particular, I very much doubt it.
fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de 6 days ago
That assumes that whatever we have now is a precursor to AGI. There’s no evidence of that.
underscore_@sopuli.xyz 1 week ago
It is a common misconception that incremental improvements must equate to eventually achieving the goal, but it is perfectly possible that progress could be asymptotic and we never reach AGI even with constant “advancements”
MidWestKhagan@lemmygrad.ml 6 days ago
That doesn’t sound right at all, comparing AGI to digging a hole from Spain to New Zealand is hyperbolic. Sounds like more like “electricity will never cover the whole world, maybe one day it’ll have an impact, but powering cars and homes? No way”. AGI and SGI is almost our only way to communism, with Deepseek and other open source models capitalists won’t be able to keep up, especially if AGI becomes available to your average person. In a few years, hell just one year alone, LLMs have made substantial progress that we can only assume it will continue to grow. Acting as if though AGI is like fusion generators is naive, unlike containing the sun, AGI is far more possible because it is. There’s no stopping it at this point, my professor told me that they have stopped trying to catch AI as a university because it’s impossible to do so now, unless you’re a child and just copy everything and it’s obvious. It’s time to stop assuming AGI will never come because it will, and it is.
HakFoo@lemmy.sdf.org 1 week ago
Would we know it if we saw it? Draw two eye spots on a wooden spoon amd people will anthromorphise it. I suspect we’ll have dozens of false starts and breathless announcements of AGI, but we may never get there.
More interestingly, would we want it if we got it? How long will its creators rally to its side if we throw yottabytes of data at our civilization-scale problems and the mavhine comes back with “build trains and eat the rich instead of cows?”
Free_Opinions@feddit.uk 1 week ago
Would we know it if we saw it?
That seems besides the point when the question is about wether we’re getting closer to it or not.
HakFoo@lemmy.sdf.org 3 days ago
How can we ask “are we closer” if we don’t know what the destination is?
LLMs might still end up being an interesting special-purpose system, perhaps with fairly broad applications, but in a direction that’s different from where true AGI ends up coming from.
halfapage@lemmy.world 1 week ago
[deleted]Free_Opinions@feddit.uk 1 week ago
But objectively measured no? Is there no progress happening at all, or are we moving backwards? Because it’s either of those two or then we’re moving towards it.
zante@slrpnk.net 1 week ago
Right?
If I was OpenAI, this exactly the kind of thing I’d want written about me, especially the day after the deepseek thing….just saying.
jrs100000@lemmy.world 6 days ago
Its probably part of the standard severance package. Hand in your laptop, sign an NDA, take your COBRA paperwork, and fill out the AGI terror press release.