• barsoap
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    But that isn’t to say human intelligence can’t be surpassed by something distinctly inhuman.

    Tell me you haven’t read the paper without telling me you haven’t read the paper. The paper is about T2 vs. T3 systems, humans are just an example.

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah I skimmed a bit. I’m on like 4 hours of in flight sleep after like 24 hours of air ports and flying. If you really want me to address the points of the paper, I can, but I can also tell it doesn’t diminish my primary point: dismiss at your own peril.

      • barsoap
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        dismiss at your own peril.

        Oooo I’m scared. Just as much as I was scared of missing out on crypto or the last 10000 hype trains VCs rode into bankruptcy. I’m both too old and too much of an engineer for that BS especially when the answer to a technical argument, a fucking information-theoretical one on top of that, is “Dude, but consider FOMO”.

        That said, I still wish you all the best in your scientific career in applied statistics. Stuff can be interesting and useful aside from AI BS. If OTOH you’re in that career path because AI BS and not a love for the maths… let’s just say that vacation doesn’t help against burnout. Switch tracks, instead, don’t do what you want but what you can.

        Or do dive into AGI. But then actually read the paper, and understand why current approaches are nowhere near sufficient. We’re not talking about changes in architecture, we’re about architectures that change as a function of training and inference, that learn how to learn. Say goodbye to the VC cesspit, get tenure aka a day job, maybe in 50 years there’s going to be another sigmoid and you’ll have written one of the papers leading up to it because you actually addressed the fucking core problem.

        • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          2 months ago

          I mean I’ve been doing this for 20 years and have led teams from 2-3 in size to 40. I’ve been the lead on systems that have had to undergo legal review at a state level, where the output literally determines policy for almost every home in a state. So you can be as dismissive or enthusiastic as you like. I could truly actually give a shit about ley opinion cus I’m out here doing this, building it, and I see it every day.

          For any one with ears to listen, dismiss this current round at your at your own peril.

          • barsoap
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Perilous, eh. Threatening tales of impeding doom and destruction. Who are you actually trying to convince, here. I doubt it’s me I’d be flattered but don’t think you care enough.

            If Roko’s Basilisk is forcing you, blink twice.