[HN Gopher] Shane Legg: Machine Super Intelligence (2008) [pdf]
___________________________________________________________________
Shane Legg: Machine Super Intelligence (2008) [pdf]
Author : Anon84
Score : 50 points
Date : 2024-05-09 16:19 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.vetta.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.vetta.org)
| nmwnmw wrote:
| Author is Shane Legg, cofounder of DeepMind.
| bamboozled wrote:
| Would be good if a super intelligence helped them fix their HTTPS
| configuration.
| blueboo wrote:
| even AGI has its limits.
| dvaun wrote:
| https://archive.is/U2rz5
| nico wrote:
| This is just a screenshot of a pdf reader showing the first
| page of the pdf
| dvaun wrote:
| Jeez, you're right. Didn't catch that
| dsubburam wrote:
| His 2008 Ph.D. dissertation. Could probably use a [2008] tag on
| the title.
| nico wrote:
| Link without ssl (notice the http at the beginning):
|
| http://www.vetta.org/documents/Machine_Super_Intelligence.pd...
| ramoz wrote:
| From: Is building intelligent machines a good idea?
|
| > If one accepts that the impact of truly intelligent machines is
| likely to be profound, and that there is at least a small
| probability of this happening in the foreseeable future, it is
| only prudent to try to prepare for this in advance. If we wait
| until it seems very likely that intelligent machines will soon
| appear, it will be too late to thoroughly discuss and contemplate
| the issues involved.
|
| So, are we too late?
| NoMoreNicksLeft wrote:
| > So, are we too late?
|
| If we're not too late, then surely we're waiting til the last
| possible moment. There's a Fermi Paradox hanging over our
| heads, and all we hear from the LLM crowd is "you're being
| silly, there's nothing to worry about here".
| landryraccoon wrote:
| I don't get how AI can be a possible solution to the Fermi
| Paradox.
|
| If an AI is intelligent enough and capable enough to displace
| a biological species, then the paradox remains. The question
| just becomes, why hasn't the galaxy already been colonized by
| robots instead of biological organisms?
| happypumpkin wrote:
| Maybe the species that create advanced AI use it to extinct
| themselves before the AI is fully autonomous and self-
| sustaining? Presumably "help an ~average intelligence but
| crazy person make a bioweapon" would come before AI capable
| of self-sustaining and colonizing the galaxy?
| landryraccoon wrote:
| The scenario you described is just suicide. An AI that is
| acting on behalf of a controller and has no ability to
| make autonomous decisions is just a tool. To me that's no
| different conceptually than a race destroying itself with
| nuclear weapons, but simply replacing nukes with some
| sort of drone or automated weapon. It wouldn't be AGI.
| happypumpkin wrote:
| I agree, I'm not saying it would be AGI, just that it
| would make AI a solution to the Fermi Paradox.
| user90131313 wrote:
| Maybe, maybe some other galaxy is already colonized and
| died or their light still not reached us. Or we can't
| detect it with our toys. Our time to look for real things
| in universe is like literally nothing compared to billion
| years.
| dinosaurdynasty wrote:
| https://grabbyaliens.com/ is a solution to this.
|
| Basically "if they did already, we wouldn't be here, so we
| exist before the universe gets colonized." (Also they
| colonize fast, ~0.3c, so you don't see it coming.)
| wslh wrote:
| Why AI hasn't discovered a time machine?
| anothernewdude wrote:
| Fermi isn't a paradox, the energy requirements are too high
| for travel.
|
| LLMs are pathetic.
| NoMoreNicksLeft wrote:
| Nuclear saltwater rockets seem pretty feasible to me. There
| won't be any Star Trekking going on, but hitting the next
| stars 4-5ly out doesn't seem completely out of the realm of
| possibility. Our biology's a little screwed, but even on
| Earth there are organisms with the correct
| lifespan/fertility that they could colonize such worlds as
| they found habitable.
|
| > LLMs are pathetic.
|
| Perhaps. But is there anyone here who believes that if we
| do eventually come up with an artificial mind, that LLMs
| won't be at the very least, a component of such an
| achievement? Insufficient on their own, but likely
| necessary.
| sjkoelle wrote:
| striking how closely ij good's conception of machine
| superintelligence is matched today
| http://incompleteideas.net/papers/Good65ultraintelligent.pdf
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-05-09 23:00 UTC)