←back to thread

I don't think AGI is right around the corner

(www.dwarkesh.com)
336 points mooreds | 2 comments | 06 Jul 25 20:45 UTC | HN request time: 0.397s | source
Show context
A_D_E_P_T ◴[06 Jul 25 21:32 UTC] No.44484248[source]▶
See also: Dwarkesh's Question

> https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2025/02/dw...

> "One question I had for you while we were talking about the intelligence stuff was, as a scientist yourself, what do you make of the fact that these things have basically the entire corpus of human knowledge memorized and they haven’t been able to make a single new connection that has led to a discovery? Whereas if even a moderately intelligent person had this much stuff memorized, they would notice — Oh, this thing causes this symptom. This other thing also causes this symptom. There’s a medical cure right here.

> "Shouldn’t we be expecting that kind of stuff?"

I basically agree and think that the lack of answers to this question constitutes a real problem for people who believe that AGI is right around the corner.

replies(4): >>44484392 #>>44484448 #>>44484503 #>>44485534 #
vessenes ◴[06 Jul 25 21:49 UTC] No.44484392[source]▶
I think gwern gave a good hot take on this: it’s super rare for humans to do this; it might just be moving the chains to complain the ai can’t.
replies(1): >>44485597 #
IAmGraydon ◴[07 Jul 25 00:48 UTC] No.44485597[source]▶
No, it’s really not that rare. There are new scientific discoveries all time, and all from people who don’t have the advantage of having the entire corpus of human knowledge in their heads.
replies(1): >>44489631 #
1. vessenes ◴[07 Jul 25 12:24 UTC] No.44489631[source]▶
To be clear the “this” is a knowledge based “aha” that comes from integrating information from various fields of study or research and applying that to make a new invention / discovery.

This isn’t that common even among billions of humans. Most discoveries tend to be random or accidental even in the lab. Or are the result of massive search processes, like drug development.

replies(1): >>44489793 #
2. LegionMammal978 ◴[07 Jul 25 12:42 UTC] No.44489793[source]▶
Regardless of goalposts, I'd imagine that a persistent lack of "intuitive-discovery-ability" would put a huge dent in the "nigh-unlimited AI takeoff" narrative that so many people are pushing. In such a scenario, AI might be able to optimize the search processes quite a bit, but the search would still be bottlenecked by available resources, and ultimately suffer from diminishing returns, instead of the oft-predicted accelerating returns.