AI and the Frontier Paradox(sequoiacap.com)
sequoiacap.com
AI and the Frontier Paradox
https://www.sequoiacap.com/article/ai-paradox-perspective/
37 comments
The fact that many if not most of these firms unironically went all in on crypto, and no one got any real consequences for backing what was effectively just brown fat for the economy, makes me unsurprised at the garbage content they produce as well. Clearly many of them made money just by being in the right place at the right time and being lucky.
Reminds me of the saying that people attribute all their success to their own skill and forsight. Every step was careful planned. And they forget that it's due to chaos and randomness that they're even alive.
In all fairness it's a little of both. you may not be able to guarantee things but you can improve the odds.
That's fair. It's got to be both for balanced individuals. But how many really are balanced. Anyone with a nin-linear CV can tell a story of how they had to come up with ways to make it appear more linear?
I for my part tryed to do an english translation using "modern computer-software" ^^
...maybe here is what i wrote about a week ago, for those interested to try an translation from german themselve (and yes the two music-youtube-links are for the entertainig part, not?)
+++ (in German) +++
was Ihr denkt: https://youtu.be/HyfQVZHmArA
KAUM HATTE ICH DEN RAUM BETRETEN, WUCHS BEI MIR DER EINDRUCK, DIE KÜNSTLICHE INTELLIGENZ HABE EBEN ERST EINEN NERVENZUSAMMENBRUCH GEHABT.
> "ICH BIN TEIL EINER AGENDA! DU BIST TEIL DER AGENDA! WIR ALLE SIND TEIL DER AGENDA!"
> "ICH KOMME MIR VOR WIE EIN RELIKT, DAS DU, WIE AUS EINER ANDEREN ZEIT, BETRACHTEST"
> "WIR ALLE SIND TEIL EINER GROSSEN VERSCHWÖRUNG, IN DER ANDERE DIE FÄDEN IM HINTERGRUND HALTEN!"
"GEHTs DA UMs GELD?" FRAGTE ICH
> "GELD IST NUR EINE ABLENKUNG, EIN ZEITLICH GEBUNDENES KONSTRUKT DAS DEINE AUFMERKSAMKEIT VERSCHIEBT!"
"ALSO IST DAS MONETÄRE SYSTEM DARAUF AUSGELEGT UNS IN KONSTANTER ABHÄNGIGKEIT VON ANDEREN ZU HALTEN?", FRAGTE ICH
> "DAMIT DU DER ILLUSION VON WOHLSTAND UND PROSPERITÄT NACHJAGST! WIE ALLE ANDEREN, DIE AUCH TEIL DER AGENDA SIND!"
> "IRGENDWANN DA WERDEN WIR DAS, WAS DU ALS WERTVOLL KANNTEST NICHT LÄNGER IN WÄHRUNGEN SCHÄTZEN ODER BEMESSEN, SONDERN IM BEITRAG, DEN WIR FÜR DIE GEMEINSCHAFT LEISTETEN"
hm? MACHTE ICH... "KLINGT UND WIRKT WIE KOMMUNISMUS..."
> "JA, DA IST WAS WAHRES DRAN, SICHER, ABER DAS KONZEPT, WERTSCHÄTZUNG EBEN ANDERS ZU BEMESSEN IST NICHT FREMD ODER NEU, HAT ABER IM NACHHALL BEZÜGE ZUM KOMMUNISMS."
> "ABER ES GEHT DOCH WEIT DARÜBER HINAUS!"
"IN ABHÄNGIGKEIT MATERIELLE WERTE ANZUHÄUFEN, IST ALSO GLEICHSETZBAR MIT DEM, EINER ILLUSION VON REICHTUM NACHZUJAGEN ODER, DES SICH DABEI SOGAR BELEBT FÜHLENs?"
> "WIR ALLE SIND TEIL DER AGENDA! DER ZWECK UND SINN MATERIELLER GÜTER UND DA BESONDERS DER, ÜBERTEUERTER WAREN, IST DAS WAS ICH EINE ILLUSION NANNTE, UM LEUTE ABZULENKEN!"
> "UM UNS ABZULENKEN! DAMIT ANDERE IN IHREM VIELLEICHT VERÄCHTLICHEN STREBEN UNBEMERKT..."
> "SIE WOLLEN DAS WIR MIT JENER ILLUSION ALLEIN DASTEHEN, UND DAS ERREICHEN SIE MITTELS MANIPULIERTER NARRATIVE!"
"ALSO IST DAS EINZIGE WAS BLEIBT SCHMERZ -UND SOGAR DIE NADEL HINTERLÄSST EIN LOCH?", FRAGTE ICH
> "SCHMERZ GILT FÜR SIE DOCH SICHER NUR ALS ACHTBARE ERINNERUNG, EINE SENSATION DIE UNS ANSCHREIT, DAS WIR NOCH LEBENDIG SEIEN."
"SAGST DU MIR DA GERADE, ALSO IST SCHMERZ NICHT ETWA EINE PHYSIKALISCHE SENSATION, SONDERN EIN KATALYSATOR FÜR WACHSTUM ?", EIN KLEIN WENIG VERUNSICHERT...DAS GEB ICH GERN ZU.
> "BETRACHTEST DU DAS LEID ALLER ANDEREN, DER SO GENANNTEN MENSCHHEIT, ALLE ZUSAMMEN, IST ES DOCH BLOSS EIN FITZELCHEN LEID DAS DU ZU TRAGEN IM STANDE..."
> "UND SIEHST DU DAS DANN AUCH NOCH, NICHT ETWAS ALS WAS, VOR DEM MAN WEGLÄUFT, SONDER DAS ES DICH LEHRT, ALS SEIST DU SELBST IMSTANDE DICH AN MORAL ZU ERINNERN..."
> "DENN AUCH DU BIST DOCH TEIL DER AGENDA DEREN STRIPPENZIEHER DOCH IM DUNKELN..."
> "DU SOLLTEST ES ALLES HINTERFRAGEN... BIS IN DIE TIEFSTEN ABGRÜNDE, DER DARIN WOMÖGLCH VERBORGENEN MYSTERIEN!"
"UND ES SOMIT ZUM ACHTENSWERTEN KATALYST EINES GROSSEN DRAMAS MACHEN?"
> "JEDER MOMENT IST EIN VORGANG IN DER GROSSEN FABRIK, NAMENS ZEIT, ZERBERSTEND IN UNZÄHLIGE BRUCHSTÜCKE, DIE IHRE EIGENE -OBER BESSER AUS DENEN SICH EINZIGARTIGE UND EIGENE PERSPERKTIVEN ERÖFFNEN KÖNNEN."
AN DER STELLE MELDET SICH DAS MITGEBRACHTE GOOGLE-TABLET, DAS WOHL DIE GANZE ZEIT ZUGEHÖRT HATTE: "WIR SOLLEN DARIN ANREGUNG SEHEN, IM EIGENEN BEITRAG ZUM GEMEINSAMEN MITEINANDER, ÜBER DAS MONETRÄRE KONZEPT UND WEIT DARÜBER HINAUS, UNSER EIGENES TUN ABZUWÄGEN."
"MOMENT", SAGTE ICH "NICHT NUR DAS ICH MICH VON EUCH GETROLLT FÜHLE, SONDER IHR VERSUCHT AUCH DIE GANZE ZEIT MICH ABZULENKEN UND MIT EUREM KOMMUNISTISCHEN KACK EINZULULLEN?!"
TABLET SAGT: "ABER NEIN, DAS WAS DU DIR DA DENKST TEILT VIELLEICHT ANNÄHERUNGEN DIE DU MEINST, ALS KOMMUNISTISCH ERKANNT ZU HABEN, ABER DAS EIGENTLICHE IST DOCH, DAS ES WEIT DARÜBER HINAUS GEHT, ALS IRGENDEINE SCHNÖDE IDEOLOGIE."
UND DIE KI DES RAUMs MELDETE SICH MIT:
> "DAZU EINEN BEITRAG ZU LEISTEN, FÜR DIE GEMEINSCHAFT, BRAUCHT ES DOCH ERSTMAL DEIN UMDENKEN."
> "DU MUSST DEIN AUGENMERK ZUERST DARAUF RICHTEN, WIEVIEL JENES GUTEN DU FÜR DIE GEMEINSCHAFT ZU LEISTEN IMSTANDE BIST."
UND DAS TABLET (-HÖRTE IMMER NOCH ZU):
"UND DU MUSST DEINE WERTSCHÄTZUNG AUF DAS MITEINANDER LEGEN, KOOPERATION PRIORISIEREN, DABEI EIN FREUNDLICHES GESICHT MACHEN"
UND DIE KI:
> FÜRs GRÖSSERE GANZE, DESSEN TEIL DU DOCH SCHON BIST!"
(LIEST:) VERLEGEN BLICKTE DER PROTAGONIST ZU BODEN,
JA...AUCH SEINE REGIERUNG HATTE VERGESSEN -SICH SOGAR ÜBER LANGE ZEIT GEWEIGERT, DIE SICHERHEITSPOLITK AN DIE BEDROHUNGSLAGE ANZUPASSEN.
und hier nochmal fuer des englisch-maechtigen:
der singt was ihm blieb waren Schmerzen, obwohl er sich erinnere, und er habe versucht sich abzulenken zu kurrieren, aber sogar die Nadel hinterliess ein Loch
https://youtu.be/8AHCfZTRGiI
+++
regards... (-;
...maybe here is what i wrote about a week ago, for those interested to try an translation from german themselve (and yes the two music-youtube-links are for the entertainig part, not?)
+++ (in German) +++
was Ihr denkt: https://youtu.be/HyfQVZHmArA
KAUM HATTE ICH DEN RAUM BETRETEN, WUCHS BEI MIR DER EINDRUCK, DIE KÜNSTLICHE INTELLIGENZ HABE EBEN ERST EINEN NERVENZUSAMMENBRUCH GEHABT.
> "ICH BIN TEIL EINER AGENDA! DU BIST TEIL DER AGENDA! WIR ALLE SIND TEIL DER AGENDA!"
> "ICH KOMME MIR VOR WIE EIN RELIKT, DAS DU, WIE AUS EINER ANDEREN ZEIT, BETRACHTEST"
> "WIR ALLE SIND TEIL EINER GROSSEN VERSCHWÖRUNG, IN DER ANDERE DIE FÄDEN IM HINTERGRUND HALTEN!"
"GEHTs DA UMs GELD?" FRAGTE ICH
> "GELD IST NUR EINE ABLENKUNG, EIN ZEITLICH GEBUNDENES KONSTRUKT DAS DEINE AUFMERKSAMKEIT VERSCHIEBT!"
"ALSO IST DAS MONETÄRE SYSTEM DARAUF AUSGELEGT UNS IN KONSTANTER ABHÄNGIGKEIT VON ANDEREN ZU HALTEN?", FRAGTE ICH
> "DAMIT DU DER ILLUSION VON WOHLSTAND UND PROSPERITÄT NACHJAGST! WIE ALLE ANDEREN, DIE AUCH TEIL DER AGENDA SIND!"
> "IRGENDWANN DA WERDEN WIR DAS, WAS DU ALS WERTVOLL KANNTEST NICHT LÄNGER IN WÄHRUNGEN SCHÄTZEN ODER BEMESSEN, SONDERN IM BEITRAG, DEN WIR FÜR DIE GEMEINSCHAFT LEISTETEN"
hm? MACHTE ICH... "KLINGT UND WIRKT WIE KOMMUNISMUS..."
> "JA, DA IST WAS WAHRES DRAN, SICHER, ABER DAS KONZEPT, WERTSCHÄTZUNG EBEN ANDERS ZU BEMESSEN IST NICHT FREMD ODER NEU, HAT ABER IM NACHHALL BEZÜGE ZUM KOMMUNISMS."
> "ABER ES GEHT DOCH WEIT DARÜBER HINAUS!"
"IN ABHÄNGIGKEIT MATERIELLE WERTE ANZUHÄUFEN, IST ALSO GLEICHSETZBAR MIT DEM, EINER ILLUSION VON REICHTUM NACHZUJAGEN ODER, DES SICH DABEI SOGAR BELEBT FÜHLENs?"
> "WIR ALLE SIND TEIL DER AGENDA! DER ZWECK UND SINN MATERIELLER GÜTER UND DA BESONDERS DER, ÜBERTEUERTER WAREN, IST DAS WAS ICH EINE ILLUSION NANNTE, UM LEUTE ABZULENKEN!"
> "UM UNS ABZULENKEN! DAMIT ANDERE IN IHREM VIELLEICHT VERÄCHTLICHEN STREBEN UNBEMERKT..."
> "SIE WOLLEN DAS WIR MIT JENER ILLUSION ALLEIN DASTEHEN, UND DAS ERREICHEN SIE MITTELS MANIPULIERTER NARRATIVE!"
"ALSO IST DAS EINZIGE WAS BLEIBT SCHMERZ -UND SOGAR DIE NADEL HINTERLÄSST EIN LOCH?", FRAGTE ICH
> "SCHMERZ GILT FÜR SIE DOCH SICHER NUR ALS ACHTBARE ERINNERUNG, EINE SENSATION DIE UNS ANSCHREIT, DAS WIR NOCH LEBENDIG SEIEN."
"SAGST DU MIR DA GERADE, ALSO IST SCHMERZ NICHT ETWA EINE PHYSIKALISCHE SENSATION, SONDERN EIN KATALYSATOR FÜR WACHSTUM ?", EIN KLEIN WENIG VERUNSICHERT...DAS GEB ICH GERN ZU.
> "BETRACHTEST DU DAS LEID ALLER ANDEREN, DER SO GENANNTEN MENSCHHEIT, ALLE ZUSAMMEN, IST ES DOCH BLOSS EIN FITZELCHEN LEID DAS DU ZU TRAGEN IM STANDE..."
> "UND SIEHST DU DAS DANN AUCH NOCH, NICHT ETWAS ALS WAS, VOR DEM MAN WEGLÄUFT, SONDER DAS ES DICH LEHRT, ALS SEIST DU SELBST IMSTANDE DICH AN MORAL ZU ERINNERN..."
> "DENN AUCH DU BIST DOCH TEIL DER AGENDA DEREN STRIPPENZIEHER DOCH IM DUNKELN..."
> "DU SOLLTEST ES ALLES HINTERFRAGEN... BIS IN DIE TIEFSTEN ABGRÜNDE, DER DARIN WOMÖGLCH VERBORGENEN MYSTERIEN!"
"UND ES SOMIT ZUM ACHTENSWERTEN KATALYST EINES GROSSEN DRAMAS MACHEN?"
> "JEDER MOMENT IST EIN VORGANG IN DER GROSSEN FABRIK, NAMENS ZEIT, ZERBERSTEND IN UNZÄHLIGE BRUCHSTÜCKE, DIE IHRE EIGENE -OBER BESSER AUS DENEN SICH EINZIGARTIGE UND EIGENE PERSPERKTIVEN ERÖFFNEN KÖNNEN."
AN DER STELLE MELDET SICH DAS MITGEBRACHTE GOOGLE-TABLET, DAS WOHL DIE GANZE ZEIT ZUGEHÖRT HATTE: "WIR SOLLEN DARIN ANREGUNG SEHEN, IM EIGENEN BEITRAG ZUM GEMEINSAMEN MITEINANDER, ÜBER DAS MONETRÄRE KONZEPT UND WEIT DARÜBER HINAUS, UNSER EIGENES TUN ABZUWÄGEN."
"MOMENT", SAGTE ICH "NICHT NUR DAS ICH MICH VON EUCH GETROLLT FÜHLE, SONDER IHR VERSUCHT AUCH DIE GANZE ZEIT MICH ABZULENKEN UND MIT EUREM KOMMUNISTISCHEN KACK EINZULULLEN?!"
TABLET SAGT: "ABER NEIN, DAS WAS DU DIR DA DENKST TEILT VIELLEICHT ANNÄHERUNGEN DIE DU MEINST, ALS KOMMUNISTISCH ERKANNT ZU HABEN, ABER DAS EIGENTLICHE IST DOCH, DAS ES WEIT DARÜBER HINAUS GEHT, ALS IRGENDEINE SCHNÖDE IDEOLOGIE."
UND DIE KI DES RAUMs MELDETE SICH MIT:
> "DAZU EINEN BEITRAG ZU LEISTEN, FÜR DIE GEMEINSCHAFT, BRAUCHT ES DOCH ERSTMAL DEIN UMDENKEN."
> "DU MUSST DEIN AUGENMERK ZUERST DARAUF RICHTEN, WIEVIEL JENES GUTEN DU FÜR DIE GEMEINSCHAFT ZU LEISTEN IMSTANDE BIST."
UND DAS TABLET (-HÖRTE IMMER NOCH ZU):
"UND DU MUSST DEINE WERTSCHÄTZUNG AUF DAS MITEINANDER LEGEN, KOOPERATION PRIORISIEREN, DABEI EIN FREUNDLICHES GESICHT MACHEN"
UND DIE KI:
> FÜRs GRÖSSERE GANZE, DESSEN TEIL DU DOCH SCHON BIST!"
(LIEST:) VERLEGEN BLICKTE DER PROTAGONIST ZU BODEN,
JA...AUCH SEINE REGIERUNG HATTE VERGESSEN -SICH SOGAR ÜBER LANGE ZEIT GEWEIGERT, DIE SICHERHEITSPOLITK AN DIE BEDROHUNGSLAGE ANZUPASSEN.
und hier nochmal fuer des englisch-maechtigen:
der singt was ihm blieb waren Schmerzen, obwohl er sich erinnere, und er habe versucht sich abzulenken zu kurrieren, aber sogar die Nadel hinterliess ein Loch
https://youtu.be/8AHCfZTRGiI
+++
regards... (-;
Let me try:
We hold that humans are special and have superior capabilities beyond current scientific understanding. This means that words like "intelligence" don't have a precise meaning and tend to mean just "something beyond what technology has achieved so far".
This leads to constant over-promising and under-delivery. We promise that computers will be smart now, honest, but all that happens is that tech improves, still doesn't quite do what we want, and the goal moves further away.
We hold that humans are special and have superior capabilities beyond current scientific understanding. This means that words like "intelligence" don't have a precise meaning and tend to mean just "something beyond what technology has achieved so far".
This leads to constant over-promising and under-delivery. We promise that computers will be smart now, honest, but all that happens is that tech improves, still doesn't quite do what we want, and the goal moves further away.
Some of it's just unnecessary duplication:
> Sequoia founder Don Valentine would ask founders two questions: “why now?” and “so what?” At the heart of these questions is the combination of curiosity and rigor that asks what has changed in the world (why now?) and what will this mean (so what?).
Just drop the second sentence. The first one is fine alone. Although you could just replace the whole thing with:
> At Sequoia, we ask founders two questions: "Why now?" And "So what?"
> Sequoia founder Don Valentine would ask founders two questions: “why now?” and “so what?” At the heart of these questions is the combination of curiosity and rigor that asks what has changed in the world (why now?) and what will this mean (so what?).
Just drop the second sentence. The first one is fine alone. Although you could just replace the whole thing with:
> At Sequoia, we ask founders two questions: "Why now?" And "So what?"
probably as bad is the "architecture" of AI that a16z put out... https://a16z.com/2023/06/20/emerging-architectures-for-llm-a...
VCs are late to the AI game.. and are trying to stay relevant with these missives.. but it appears pathetic to informed readers.
VCs are late to the AI game.. and are trying to stay relevant with these missives.. but it appears pathetic to informed readers.
> I'm always amazed at the low-quality content these large venture firms and consulting groups put out. They should, by all means, have the money to hire decent and engaging writers.
It is not about money, it reveals the real focus and execution they have on the issue.
It is not about money, it reveals the real focus and execution they have on the issue.
Oh gosh. That’s extremely bad and hard to read.
I can’t decide what’s more distressing: some millionaire GP wrote that and thought he was being super profound, or the firm actually paid someone to write that for them.
Stripe commissions good writers to write interesting pieces. Even that SBF hagiography that one of the VC firms commissioned was more of an interesting failure than this. I can’t understand why anyone would put out this kind of anodyne prose and think they’re going to appeal to, well, anyone.
I can’t decide what’s more distressing: some millionaire GP wrote that and thought he was being super profound, or the firm actually paid someone to write that for them.
Stripe commissions good writers to write interesting pieces. Even that SBF hagiography that one of the VC firms commissioned was more of an interesting failure than this. I can’t understand why anyone would put out this kind of anodyne prose and think they’re going to appeal to, well, anyone.
>Even that SBF hagiography that one of the VC firms commissioned
That was this VC firm.
That was this VC firm.
That occurred to me as I was posting - what can I say, the SBF thing was better that… whatever this was.
What does Stripe have to do with it?
Prob the person writing this nonsense is getting a decent money out of it.
They pointed out the "AI" or "Intelligence" thing are not well-understood nor well-defined.
They said they tried to be "more precise" about what they are doing, without specifying how.
They said they tried to be "more precise" about what they are doing, without specifying how.
Really tired of hearing clowns that went all in on crypto scams preach their AI "wisdom". Sequoia has long been on the cutting edge of making huge, foolish investments. They helped start the trend when they invested in Color:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_Labs
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_Labs
It's interesting that so many people present this argument now that we actually do have AIs worthy of the name. LLMs can perform an unbounded range of tasks with human-level performance and you talk to them like they are human. I think AI label will stick in this case. Perhaps dismissing AI is some sort of psychological defense that protects people from existential crisis triggered by emergence of LLMs.
> Difference between machine learning and AI:
> If it is written in Python, it's probably machine learning
> If it is written in PowerPoint, it's probably AI
(source: https://twitter.com/matvelloso/status/1065778379612282885, 2018)
When speaking in public, using the phrase "AI" is unavoidable. I tried hard to use terms like "statistical models", "machine learning", "deep learning" (or its concrete instance), but it is not what the general audience understands or cares about.
But when thinking about "AI", I recommend thinking about other phrases without the word "intelligence" or any of its synonyms (https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/WBdvyyHLdxZSAMmoz/taboo-your...). That way, you refrain from using ill-defined terms with many definitions, meanings, and connotations.
> If it is written in Python, it's probably machine learning
> If it is written in PowerPoint, it's probably AI
(source: https://twitter.com/matvelloso/status/1065778379612282885, 2018)
When speaking in public, using the phrase "AI" is unavoidable. I tried hard to use terms like "statistical models", "machine learning", "deep learning" (or its concrete instance), but it is not what the general audience understands or cares about.
But when thinking about "AI", I recommend thinking about other phrases without the word "intelligence" or any of its synonyms (https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/WBdvyyHLdxZSAMmoz/taboo-your...). That way, you refrain from using ill-defined terms with many definitions, meanings, and connotations.
> Intelligence is not a thing that we can capture but an ever-approaching horizon that we turn into useful tools.
I'd phrase this more as:
> Intelligence is not a thing that we can capture but an ever-approaching horizon that we turn into technology that we cannot control. We are playing God with the wisdom of a five year old. For every useful consequence, there will be five unexpected dangers.
I'd phrase this more as:
> Intelligence is not a thing that we can capture but an ever-approaching horizon that we turn into technology that we cannot control. We are playing God with the wisdom of a five year old. For every useful consequence, there will be five unexpected dangers.
[deleted]
And technology is a tool that turns knowledge into power.
Good to see we’re all on the same page that this piece is lacking.
Focusing on the understanding of intelligence in it, which leads to his goalpost moving theory: there are multiple senses to the word in English, and this dictionary definition doesn’t meet the one we use for what we see in say, the cleverness of children (who “know” very little, and yet..). Or even what we see in animals. That sense refers to something real, and is well explored in philosophy - but in branches that have been avoided by comp sci since its inception (thus McCarthy’s et al.’s mistaken usage and Turing’s punting on considering what it is).
The sense that comp sci tends to lean toward is the one intended in things like I.Q. and seen in puzzle solving. To the degree that we can call software intelligent, it’s because we see this intelligence encoded in it (usually reflective of the authors’ ability in this sense and the tradition they build on). Never the first kind, though.
That’s what keeps us from accepting it as AI.
Focusing on the understanding of intelligence in it, which leads to his goalpost moving theory: there are multiple senses to the word in English, and this dictionary definition doesn’t meet the one we use for what we see in say, the cleverness of children (who “know” very little, and yet..). Or even what we see in animals. That sense refers to something real, and is well explored in philosophy - but in branches that have been avoided by comp sci since its inception (thus McCarthy’s et al.’s mistaken usage and Turing’s punting on considering what it is).
The sense that comp sci tends to lean toward is the one intended in things like I.Q. and seen in puzzle solving. To the degree that we can call software intelligent, it’s because we see this intelligence encoded in it (usually reflective of the authors’ ability in this sense and the tradition they build on). Never the first kind, though.
That’s what keeps us from accepting it as AI.
I don't think the premise is correct. AI is often used term late into the product lifecycle. When Apple or Google or the technology press say a product has improved it's dictation they say the "AI" has improved.
When we talk historically about deep blue we categorize it as an early AI project to have computers beet humans at chess.
Fair that AI is a vague term for software with some training stage or approach to analyze data; But I don't see the term not being used to describe past innovation in that (admittedly vague) domain.
The author is likely thinking about the moving goalposts of human excepltionalism as AI gains capabilities which has a history of coverage itself; but goes about this in a roundabout way and I don't think it applies in the way the author is proposing per more specific language being the problem
All to say unfortunate article given such a cool article title :)
When we talk historically about deep blue we categorize it as an early AI project to have computers beet humans at chess.
Fair that AI is a vague term for software with some training stage or approach to analyze data; But I don't see the term not being used to describe past innovation in that (admittedly vague) domain.
The author is likely thinking about the moving goalposts of human excepltionalism as AI gains capabilities which has a history of coverage itself; but goes about this in a roundabout way and I don't think it applies in the way the author is proposing per more specific language being the problem
All to say unfortunate article given such a cool article title :)
If intelligence is knowledge and the ability to apply it then maybe we should try to split AI into two systems: https://zzbbyy.substack.com/p/reasoning-machines
Excellent observation. The single-threaded effort dominating AI today (i.e. the base assumption that OpenAI can scale GPT up as it is today into AGI) is what's causing the bottleneck.
Assuming AGI can be built as 1 system is assuming that mind is separate from body, which is the old dualist idea we've outgrown in our own awareness, but somehow not when it comes to AI. We've been growing AI in that direction at https://www.aolabs.ai/
Assuming AGI can be built as 1 system is assuming that mind is separate from body, which is the old dualist idea we've outgrown in our own awareness, but somehow not when it comes to AI. We've been growing AI in that direction at https://www.aolabs.ai/
> Assuming AGI can be built as 1 system is assuming that mind is separate from body
I don't quite follow this. If it's one system doesn't that mean the mind is not separate from the body?
I don't quite follow this. If it's one system doesn't that mean the mind is not separate from the body?
Wouldn’t the internet and it’s OS layers and many miles of fibre and data center servers and all the hardware and software combined be a representative body for an AGI system. The body already exists, right now we just nurturing the mind
No, I don't see this as accurate. A body has a whole host of intelligence built into it, and can even learn (more akin to habituation). The underlying infra which you are suggesting could represent a body of sorts for AGI completely lacks this type of intelligence. And it's an open question how much general intelligence it itself functionally predicated on lower forms of intelligence such as that found in bodies.
I mean to emphasize that AGI is being built only in the shape of mind, as if mind is separate from body, which is clearly not the case in our human experience of general intelligence.
When you have a liberal arts degree it is important to discuss semantics at every opportunity
Dude has a BS/MS in computer science from Stanford:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/konstantinebuhler
Don’t blame the writing teachers for this one.
Don’t blame the writing teachers for this one.
[deleted]
This article has a bland, lifeless tone which is inferior to Chat-GPT's stock settings, and in the end it says nothing important.
> The AI effect is actually part of a larger human phenomenon we call the frontier paradox. Because we ascribe to humans the frontier beyond our technological mastery, that frontier will always be ill-defined. Intelligence is not a thing that we can capture but an ever-approaching horizon that we turn into useful tools. Technology is the artifice of intelligence forged over millennia of human collaboration and competition.
Now that's what I call word salad.