Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_ix6nksl wrote

Down by 15 years since April…

65

Ok_Homework9290 t1_ix6y3ua wrote

As eyebrow raising as that may seem, keep in mind that anyone can make a prediction on that site (which is why I don't take their predictions too seriously) and that the people that make predictions there tend to be tech-junkies, who are generally optimistic when it comes to timelines.

Also, I'm a bit skeptical that the amount of progress that's been made in AI this year (which has been impressive, no doubt) merits THAT much of a shave-off from the April prediction. I kinda feel like that's an overreaction, especially if Gato really isn't as big of a deal as some people make it seem. Just my two cents.

23

Yuli-Ban t1_ix73o10 wrote

It's not that Gato isn't a big deal as much as it's the proof of concept of a big deal.

Gato isn't AGI because it's too small, has no task generalization, and has too short of a memory. None of which was necessarily the point since it was designed to prove generalist models are possible.

If you have a follow up to Gato that's 10x or 100x larger, the ability to cross/interpolate its knowledge across learned skills, and has a context window larger than 8,000 tokens, then you're approaching something like a proto-AGI.

34

Ok_Homework9290 t1_ix75u5y wrote

Perhaps the proof of concept is a big deal, perhaps it isn't. I guess we'll have a better idea when the next version comes out, whenever that may be.

11

Lone-Pine t1_ix7cbbo wrote

> the ability to cross/interpolate its knowledge across learned skills

There's no evidence that Gato could do this and if there was, Google would let us know. When we finally get to see a generalist agent in a public demonstration, it will be interesting to see if it acts like multiple separate systems that each do their own tasks or if it will actually have a general, integrated way of relating to the world.

7

Yuli-Ban t1_ix7hy5h wrote

> There's no evidence that Gato could do this and if there was, Google would let us know.

That's my point.

Gato as it currently is lacks that capability and, thus, can't be considered even a proto-proto-AGI but rather some weird intermediate type of AI in between general and narrow AI. Or less than that: a bundle of 600 narrow AIs tied together like a fasces.

If a follow up to Gato does has task interpolation, however, then we'd need to start having serious discussion as to whether it's something like a proto-AGI.

19

GuyWithLag t1_ix8lmg8 wrote

>If you have a follow up to Gato that's 10x or 100x larger, the ability to cross/interpolate its knowledge across learned skills, and has a context window larger than 8,000 tokens, then you're approaching something like a proto-AGI.

And exactly this is why I think we're missing some structural / architectural component / breakthrough - the current models have the feel of unrolled loops.

2

rixtil41 t1_ix747ch wrote

Let's comeback in late 2026 and let's see just how wrong or right you are.

3

Yuli-Ban t1_ix73934 wrote

Should note that they're referring to a "weak" AGI, basically a general purpose task completion model. Not necessarily a sapient artificial human.

Still, exciting shift.

55

Evil_Patriarch t1_ix7zptf wrote

You say that like it's a bad thing.

I would think most people would want an AI that can do things for them, not one that is going to complain or have a bad day or get distracted or countless other problems that could come from an artificial human.

24

blueSGL t1_ix80q3q wrote

exactly, why would an AI with agency be good for anybody?
Something that can appear to have agency when required for the task would be far more preferable.

12

botfiddler t1_ix8e6q0 wrote

Human-likeness would also include thinking similar to a human and understanding things, but also being able to act like a human within certain boundaries. Companion AIs will be like that, while not having some superior skill in every field and certainly not using a huge server cluster at home.

2

SmithMano t1_ix83x6z wrote

Yea but a general AI could probably use other specific AI’s, and know which to use

1

Rumianti6 t1_ix7cddg wrote

Proto AGI by 2027. Possibility of real waifus by 2029?

18

throwaway764586893 t1_ix7h1zr wrote

Waifus don't even have to be sentient, just LOOK realistic.

5

botfiddler t1_ix8grf2 wrote

Sentience is a term used in almost esoteric ways. I don't know what you mean. If she senses the world and reacts to it, then she's sentient.

2

red75prime t1_ixbegzc wrote

Then your toilet water tank is also sentient. It senses whether it is full and reacts accordingly.

3

botfiddler t1_ixbyku0 wrote

No, I'm sure there's a difference, but not sure if there's value in discussing that here at this point.

2

red75prime t1_ixc3lln wrote

Why not? Do you think that a system designed to hone an art of making you believe that its performances of expressing various emotions are genuine, while having no analogs of human emotional circuitry, does, indeed, experience all those emotions?

That is something very complex, but in the end solving not a problem of survival, self-development and so on and so forth, but a problem of producing believable and pleasurable to you movements and vocalizations in response to various stimuli.

3

botfiddler t1_ixc94eo wrote

It's just an term, which everyone can fill with their own meaning. It's not useful, and I don't need it.

2

botfiddler t1_ix8gkcq wrote

Waifus don't need to be intellectually equal or superior in every field, so a real AGI isn't required. However, it will most likely require actual work by enthusiasts to assemble a human-like AI running at home and being open source. I'll probably get started with that beginning of next year.

The AGI or proto-AGI we'll see in some time, will on the other hand most likely not think in very human-like ways, or at least not like a individual human, just being good at solving tasks. What I mean by that, for example, is long term memory about itself and an identity relating to that.

3

Sculptorman t1_ix7hg20 wrote

Maybe a dumb question but what do they mean by "Weakly General AI"?

6

spreadlove5683 t1_ix9dk9o wrote

Official resolution criteria is on the metaculus question, but i don't want to loon it up

1

loopuleasa t1_ix81iqn wrote

Doesnt matter what experts say

The real answer is "we don't know" and it depends

5

TemetN t1_ix6ws1k wrote

Still centered at 2024 on there, but I did make an adjustment early in the year down from 2025. It is worth noting however, that this is a specific operationalization.

3

AsuhoChinami t1_ixilvzq wrote

Why are we still fixated on Montezuma's Revenge just like we were in fucking 2013? An Atari game is such a low bar... can't we move on to at least Dragon Quest 1 or something?

2

ArgentStonecutter t1_ix7bx7t wrote

"Weakly General AI"? LOL

We're still on dumb pattern generators and they're already setting up to fake the close.

−8

Veneck t1_ix7ibc6 wrote

You're referring to humans right?

11

AsuhoChinami t1_ixgcds3 wrote

He's a staunch technoskeptic and very rarely posts anything worth reading.

3

footurist t1_ix7fhfz wrote

For some reason these people aren't willing to accept just how different a continuously learning, efficient, general abstracter like our brain is from these giant clever data crunchers.

I highly doubt they'll be able to push those to resemble what we have.

−8

blueSGL t1_ix813x6 wrote

now to be true AGI it needs to be efficient.

What's the next 'god of the gaps' you are going to move to after that?

6

footurist t1_ix81fou wrote

The reason it needs to be efficient is the wealth and complexity of computations that are required otherwise. There's already stuff like AIXI and Schmidhuber's thing if you got a couple billion years to spare...

−1