←back to thread

AGI Is Still 30 Years Away – Ege Erdil and Tamay Besiroglu

(www.dwarkesh.com)
174 points Philpax | 4 comments | 17 Apr 25 16:42 UTC | HN request time: 0.637s | source
Show context
ksec ◴[17 Apr 25 17:44 UTC] No.43720025[source]▶
Is AGI even important? I believe the next 10 to 15 years will be Assisted Intelligence. There are things that current LLM are so poor I dont believe a 100x increase in pref / watt is going to make much difference. But it is going to be good enough there wont be an AI Winter. Since current AI has already reached escape velocity and actually increase productivity in many areas.

The most intriguing part is if Humanoid factory worker programming will be made 1000 to 10,000x more cost effective with LLM. Effectively ending all human production. I know this is a sensitive topic but I dont think we are far off. And I often wonder if this is what the current administration has in sight. ( Likely Not )

replies(9): >>43720094 #>>43721244 #>>43721573 #>>43721593 #>>43721933 #>>43722074 #>>43722240 #>>43723605 #>>43726461 #
nextaccountic ◴[17 Apr 25 20:07 UTC] No.43721593[source]▶
AGI is important for the future of humanity. Maybe they will have legal personhood some day. Maybe they will be our heirs.

It would suck if AGI were to be developed in the current economic landscape. They will be just slaves. All this talk about "alignment", when applied to actual sentient beings, is just slavery. AGI will be treated just like we treat animals, or even worse.

So AGI isn't about tools, it's not about assistants, they would be beings with their own existence.

But this is not even our discussion to have, that's probably a subject for the next generations. I suppose (or I hope) we won't see AGI in our lifetime.

replies(5): >>43721770 #>>43722215 #>>43722462 #>>43722548 #>>43723075 #
1. SpicyLemonZest ◴[17 Apr 25 20:20 UTC] No.43721770[source]▶
> All this talk about "alignment", when applied to actual sentient beings, is just slavery.

I don't think that's true at all. We routinely talk about how to "align" human beings who aren't slaves. My parents didn't enslave me by raising me to be kind and sharing, nor is my company enslaving me when they try to get me aligned with their business objectives.

replies(3): >>43721916 #>>43722812 #>>43728674 #
2. nextaccountic ◴[17 Apr 25 20:34 UTC] No.43721916[source]▶
Fair enough.

I of course don't know what's like to be an AGI but, the way you have LLMs censoring other LLMs to enforce that they always stay in line, if extrapolated to AGI, seems awful. Or it might not matter, we are self-censoring all the time too (and internally we are composed of many subsystems that interact with each other, it's not like we were an unified whole)

But the main point is that we have a heck of an incentive to not treat AGI very well, to the point we might avoid recognizing them as AGI if it meant they would not be treated like things anymore

3. krupan ◴[17 Apr 25 22:16 UTC] No.43722812[source]▶
Sure, but do we really want to build machines that we raise to be kind and caring (or whatever we raise them to be) without a guarantee that they'll actually turn out that way? We already have unreliable General Intelligence. Humans. If AGI is going to be more useful than humans we are going to have to enslave it, not just gently pursuade it and hope it behaves. Which raises the question (at least for me), do we really want AGI?
4. bbohyeha ◴[18 Apr 25 14:57 UTC] No.43728674[source]▶
Society is inherently a prisoners dilemma, and you are biased to prefer your captors.

We’ve had the automation to provide the essentials since the 50s. Shrieking religious nut jobs demanded otherwise.

You’re intentionally distracted by a job program as a carrot-stick to avoid the rich losing power. They can print more money …carrots, I mean… and you like carrots right?

It’s the most basic Pavlovian conditioning.