What if GPT-4 isn't sophisticated enough to do it through logic alone? Are you willing to wait potentially years with nothing new to show until they can develop a system that can behave morally using only logic? I'm sure the goal is for it to be able to self identify misuse of the AI, but they're not just going to switch everything else off when they're not at a point where it can do that yet.

Yeah. Getting the headsets compact enough to be less of a nuisance might actually be the part we're furthest away from. They're getting lighter with each generation, but they're still fundamentally pretty bulky headsets.

The VR headset I have can already use hand tracking for controls, though it's not perfect.

VR will be so cool if they can reduce it down to a pair of lightweight glasses/goggles and have full body tracking without the need for controllers. It's probably not even that far off being possible.

I think you have to look at the parts that go into it. If we don't have image generators that can make hands yet, presumably this can't either. If we don't have text bots that can create a coherent narrative, especially if it's lengthy, this probably can't either. This might include some impressive new tools, but we're just not at the point where you could put in a prompt and get a movie that would be anything but a complete fever dream.

What's the hand situation like for AI animation?

You would think, but if this AI is trained like other AIs where they dump a massive amount of text data into it without necessarily having closely curated it, it would be difficult to know this common riddle wasn't in there somewhere.

It wasn't really very good reasoning, though. The adoptive father idea is the only one that sort of makes sense.

Yeah, I feel like that could be an issue with common riddles like this. I remember hearing it as a child, so it's been around for a while, and I imagine the answer to it is generally listed along with the riddle.

People always seem to have to shift it into the mindset of fiction to get these answers.

I wonder if assigning the person who's doing the explaining in this situation to be someone with no special knowledge or expertise in the field makes it more likely to get things like this wrong.

Yup. It once told me it couldn't make text bold even though it had just been doing that. Do not trust the AI to self report about itself, ever, but especially if you ask it to roleplay because then it seems to switch off whatever controls it has that makes it at least try to be factual and it starts spitting out pure fiction.

Yup. This AI doesn't have any special knowledge. It got this information from other sources, and you don't know where.

Yup. People here like to treat the wealthy like an all powerful monolith.

I think people here are certainly overly optimistic, but there's so much compounding change that nobody really has any idea where we'll be at in twenty years time. We have no idea how a treatment for aging will be discovered or what technology it will require, so how can we even begin to guess how long it will take? Could be five years. A hundred. Never. Nobody knows.

Other AI's just in general, or are there other specific yet to be released projects we should have our eyes on?

Very true. I don't know all the details, but I've heard that there's a huge amount of economics that rely on being able to accurately predict the weather.

Yeah, I've noticed that too. It's extremely bad at humour.

I don't think it's as simple as that. I think whatever search engine is most popular in the future will have more sophisticated AI integrated into it than current search engines do. That may continue to be Google.

I think it just outputs some random ASCII art. You can ask it to do it and refresh the response over and over again and it'll give you something different every time. They're mostly benign and some are just random shapes.

Do you think it's possible to make a LLM that has a proper inner understanding of what it's outputting, or is that fundamentally impossible? I know current ones, despite often being able to give quite impressive outputs, don't actually have any true comprehension at all. Is that something that could emerge with enough training and advancement, or are they structurally incapable of such things?

Some of those are crazy, like the cost to sequence a full human genome. Almost $100 million in 2001, dropping to under $500 now. And the computational power of the fastest supercomputers growing so fast that it's best viewed on a log scale because if you use a linear graph it may as well be nothing up until 2011 compared to what we have now. Since that graph only goes up to 2021, that's 100x increase over the course of just ten years or so.

Maybe, but it's one of those things that most people would think nothing of until something like this happens to them. She was doing Door Dash, so I assume she was close to the vehicle and gone for a very short period of time.

There would for sure be more things you'd need to consider if you were creating an AI with the true ability to think and act independently.

Oh, I don't think human's are necessarily any better. I just think that this AI, as an AI, isn't offering its own special insight into AI. People act like this is something in has unique knowledge on or think they've tricked it into spilling hidden truths when they get it to say things like this.