Watch this video! :)

Community
1469

Much bigger, by an awful long way. This thing is exponentially (or more) increasing in effectiveness and nothing that has come before (wheel, electricity, even computer software) has done that.

This is currently what LLMs are not. You are right there, but I suspect it will come. Many years ago when I started looking at AI properly I said to people, the reward function stuff is nonsense, but when we find the reward function for life these things will live.

That begs the question of what is our reward function? is it to procreate (like all animals etc.) is it to create stuff or explore new worlds, is it to expand our species or just our own gene pool and so on.

So what is the reward function for life, finding that and coding it into AI changes the game.

2 Likes
1470

The reward function must be ingrained in our being. In our brain maybe. Can AI duplicate that? What if, I dare to say, it is in our soul or ephemeral self or whatever you want to call it? If so, we can feel safe AI will not be able to simulate that… can’t we?

3 Likes
1471

I can’t remember right now who said it but someone recently called it a discovery not an invention.

Rationale being inventions are engineered and we fully understand them. Whereas we are continually discovering what “AI” is capable of.

1472

It’s fascinatingly complex. From the buddhist monk who spends life in a cave through Elon Musk or Steven Jobs or just a person who drops out and lives in the woods or the folk who don’t work but have huge families. The reward function seems to be complex in humanity.

I think if we find the reward function or whatever it is then it will be duplicated in the digital world, so probably not :wink:

1473

I can only understand intelligence by measuring it negatively.

In other words, I can only believe in an increase of my intelligence by becoming aware of what I do not know.
intelligence or pure reality is beyond my reach, not to say that it is a pure mental abstraction.

I do not know what intelligence or reality is, I can only perceive their differences and these in turn are conditioned by my own difference.

Which makes me realise how disintegrated as well as integrated I am in an undifferentiated system, a chaos in which anything I can think of can appear.

2 Likes
1474

There’s no point trying to find a reward function for life, and especially not by looking at individuals.

Life is not one and not even many. It is an aspect, a subset that we identify with and so focus on.

A good quote when wondering about the meaning, purpose etc of life, or I’d say, consciousness, is “evolution is a reasonable bet” (Roberto Assagioli). I like that because it is a modest and very considered answer.

Humans tend to lack humility or perspective when asking questions we can’t hope to understand. There’s no reward function to find, it’s a very odd thing to look for but a useful concept when trying to understand and model something that would otherwise be too hard to think about.

I think evolution, in the broadest sense is what gives rise to what we now label consciousness and intelligence, in our anthropomorphic dalliances. So evolution is the ground, and what that is, is much more interesting than what it gives rise to.

But coming back to intelligence, it is many things, but the best measure I suggest is how it relates to evolution, which rather than being a scale or contest, of lesser, greater etc, is a question of where it fits and how it contributes to the overall intelligence that is evolution (in the broadest sense).

1 Like
1475

IMO, the question of intelligence is already answered - AI’s are likely already more intelligent than us.

The real question is: how long will it take for them to be wiser than us?

[1913 Webster]
Intelligence Intel"ligence, n. [F. intelligence, L.
intelligentia, intellegentia. See Intelligent.]

  1. The act or state of knowing; the exercise of the
    understanding.

  2. The capacity to know or understand; readiness of
    comprehension; the intellect, as a gift or an endowment.

Wisdom Wis"dom (-d[u^]m), n. [AS. w[imac]sd[=o]m. See Wise,
a., and -dom.]

  1. The quality of being wise; knowledge, and the capacity to
    make due use of it; knowledge of the best ends and the
    best means; discernment and judgment; discretion;
    sagacity; skill; dexterity.

  2. The results of wise judgments; scientific or practical
    truth; acquired knowledge; erudition.

Intelligence in psychology is the acquisition of knowledge. The rate of which is what IQ tests attempt to determine.

Wisdom is the culmination of any particular intelligence.

When we run an LLM on our local machine we are seeing the wisdom that was accumulated.

We know from our experiences with these LLM’s that they aren’t yet at mid-human level for many things.

But we also know that these LLM’s during their learning phase took very little time to acquire the wisdom level that they have. A level that it would take many years for even the most astute human to acquire.

Therefore, it is reasonable to believe that the intelligence that currently exists to build these LLM’s already exceeds human level intelligence.

Many creatures can have intelligences that are off the charts, yet only ever gain limited degree’s of wisdom as they are limited in what they can experience - the octopus and the dolphin can’t see and experience all that humans can. We can swim with the dolphins, they cannot walk with us. We are tool makers and have learned to extend ourselves and these tools further increase our “territorial wisdom”.

The AI’s used to build LLM’s are certainly high level intelligences. And their territorial wisdom is potentially as broad as humanity allows them to be - as we can create tools (robotic bodies for instance) which they can utilize.

With current tech these AI’s are limited in number and territorial scope, but I think that most here believe that technology will continue to advance.

So it seems inevitable that AI’s will surpass humanity in wisdom within a decade or three and IMO sooner rather than later.

2 Likes
1476

What if the reward function is different for each individual?

1477

All intelligence is artificial, so this debate misses the main point of the matter, imo.

1 Like
1478
1 Like
1479

Did Americans really land on the moon in 1969? Not everyone thinks so.

1480

I prefer Buzz Aldrin’s approach to these arseholes.

Though he was likely as disgusted as everyone else that future planned Apollo missions were cancelled because the TV ratings went down.

Even back then, the USA showed just how shallow it was.

Any item that starts with a couple of quotes from some ancient book of dubious provenance and then starts taking issue with the efforts of some of the finest scientists and engineers the world has ever produced is on a hiding to nothing from the word go.

1481

Yea back then I knew a ham operator in the next street who listened to the audio transmissions from the direction of the moon as they approached it.

The Russians also would have loved to claim the US did not go to the moon. But no they conceded they lost the race to put men on the moon and publicly acknowledged that the US succeeded with Apollo 11. It was a dick measuring contest and thats why the program died so quickly for both the US and USSR.

Following all the steps the US made at the time, all the test launches from one man, then two men, then the apollo series, “it was just cheaper to actually go there”. There was even speeches (now declassified) prepared for the president to say if they failed in 1969

1 Like
1482

This is actually the kicker for me. Especially at this time as the US has gone out of its way to antagonise anyone who is not 100% ready to bow down to them.
What better propaganda for Russia than to join in with more “MoonHoax”?
Except that to do so would be an utter lie and demean any other statements they may want to make.

Anyone with half a brain knows fine well that Apollo 11 went to the moon and there were several other (mostly) successful missions thereafter. Those denying it happened need to get a life and grow up, get a real job instead of fishing for likes and subs on YouTube.
If you believe in the MoonHoax, what other shite will you be gullible enough to fall for?

There is no shortage of issues to criticise the USA for, why pick one that is patently false?

Once again Buzz Aldrin had the correct response - he punched the clown that was pushing this shite.

2 Likes
1483

This is exactly why I mentioned it. It would have been worth more than all the efforts the USSR put into their space program. And I’m sure they had their “ears” listening in on the audio AND the telemetry coming from the space crafts. They wanted all the data they could get to learn from. So they knew without doubt the US got to the moon.

And considering the age of Buzz at the time, it was all the more satisfying. The prick was so annoying and it was obvious he was trying to gain popularity by joining himself to one of the greatest feats of mankind. (ignoring the obvious political issues of the 60’s space race)

1484

Clear and well spoken concerns about big pharma, the WHO and the oligarchy in general working against the bulk of humanity.

1 Like
1485

My take away is that they can’t fix bitcoin - Lightning is too complicated to make accessible for regular folks. So bitcoin is going to become Hal Finney’s vision that bitcoin sovereignty (on chain trades) will be for the elites as too expensive for the masses and the masses will join centralized bitcoin ‘banks’ and be regulated by governments.

IMO - if Bitcoin devs can’t fix blockchain to make the common man a sovereign man … THEN ALL ROADS LEAD TO THE SAFE NETWORK.

2 Likes
1486

52m57. The guy is trying to build computers on a molecular scale?! Think - programmable enzymes. Also goes through the language choice question quite a bit, he’s used smalltalk, python, C++, lisp.

Pretty mind-blowing stuff, the talk just rolls by, the questions are great, I only meant to watch 10 minutes with the porridge and was glued to the whole thing!

2 Likes
1487

you overcooked the porridge…

1 Like
1488

I’m sure that “they” know that there are way more electronic assets out there than Bitcoin. However, BTC was the first financial enemy of the gods to have attacked them directly. And they, as gods, do not like that. So it must be finally dealt with, with a vengeance. (Or, they just like to take any opportunity to steal wealth regardless, especially when an entirely new field of money has opened up online since 2008.)

Hopefully SAFE can gracefully ice skate around the bottomless pits being blasted through the rink of cryptography-ensured data / communication / monetary spots and futures, by analyzing this new decimated matrix of a playing field in 2024, and planning accordingly (as if SAFE devs’ plan isn’t already a proof against something like this, but there’s always more to consider as months/years go by).

Or maybe a different result will come of all this attempted Wall Street scheming and planning. (And SAFE enters the market regardless, of course.) It’s just that I see it as: to them it must be so tantalizing to prey on convenience, while providing negative substance in retort. (Meanwhile, Safe’s plan is to utilize convenience and provide maximum substance in complement.)

1 Like