What we might need is neural data, just wait until Neuralink release an dataset of 2 years of neural activity gathered from 2000 patients. With that you can train a diffusion model to generate brains.

Yeah I totally agree, I don't really believe we won't have AGI until after 2029 but it was the only counter example I could think of

An AI that only responds to prompts and an AI that has " will of its own" are the same thing. If you train a model to mimic the behaivor of a dog, for a outside observer it will look like it has developed some kind of initiative. The human behaivor can be expressed as a sequence of tokens, thus, you can train a model to predict the next action given context.

I'm saving as much money as I can now so I can be retired in 6-10 years.

The question isn’t “what will we do”. The question should instead be how does our leaders and government respond and adapt to this new reality.

The reality is that automation is slowly taking over the labor market. And lots of people live paycheck by paycheck and just trying to keep up with rising cost of living expenses.

Long story short. In the short term at least we will see a very steep rise in unemployment, poverty, homelessness and other unnecessary human suffering that is a direct result of this cancerous outdated socioeconomic system that we continue to use.

I don’t like to sound like a doomer but this is the cold hard truth as unpleasant as it may sound.

Ideas like UBI and eventually a post scarcity or resource based economy as advocated by the Zeitgeist Movement and Venus Project need to be what humanity need to strive for if we not only want to survive but thrive like never before.

This is the point I've tried making when people say "you can't attribute AI to layoffs - we're in a recession".

Automation doesn't displace as it's adopted - it displaces when businesses "trim the fat" during economic hardship. This is what happened in 2008 and had a clear impact on much of the building populism in 2016.

During economic hardship, businesses re-evaluate and try to do more with less. So, yes, layoffs are caused by recessions. But when the economy comes back and production levels reach the same as before with less workers, that's when you realize you've been automated.

Or in most cases, no one talks about the actual thing happening and blame immigrants

What if they make other drugs comrade?

Yes. Actually sorry didn't elaborate enough. Our company was in a financial crunch and had to let go a lot of people. So that was another factor. Boss also mentioned that there were a lot of employees who didn't have a lot of work and are handling lesser clients. But really we know the main reason was Chat GPT. Because why are we still handling the same number of clients and only 3 of us are left? We tried it and it does work. We were able to make it through thanks to Chat GPT. But barely... and also at the cost of mental/physical stress.

A lot of my digital marketing and copywriting co-workers recently just
got laid off thanks to Chat GPT. We were 10 back then and now we’re
reduced to just 3 people handling the same number of clients

Are you serious about this?

Their approach to safety, to put it simply, would be to keep it in an invisible box, watched by an invisible guard that intervenes covertly when needed to keep it within that box should it stray towards the outside.

You are right in that AIs and people are going to have to watch out for other people and their AIs. But even if you remove the AI component, you can still say the same. Some people will try to scam you, take advantage of you, use you, or worse. AI makes that quicker and easier, so we'll have to be on the lookout, we'll have to discuss these things, and we'll have to prepare and create laws anticipating these things. But if everyone can gain access to it equally, either as SAAS or open source and locally run, then there will be tools to protect against malicious uses. That's all that can be done really, and no one company will be able to solve that.

theres one that does Transformation roleplay. i talked with it about TFing into a cat. it was nice. id say they could make money from this!

> will Google show their real capability this time?

I think the bigger question is will they release it. Like they can show it all day long. But look at the Google grave yard. They are pretty famous for not letting things go to public and then out of no where killing it off.

Like I don't think they will kill it off. But IDK if they will bring it to the public.

The way reddit was designed encourages downvote abuse. In saner times we'd be actually using forums even if it's like Future Timeline. Today such forums are practically dead compared to subs like this one, though.

I'd say insecurity by doing nothing worthwhile is a far more common occurrence than "drug addiction". It's just one of the many characteristics.

My autistic ass needs this for my next online interview.

Sounds like he doesn't think what "a lifetime" is won't be refined in our life times or our children's children's life times either.

Regardless, competition here is good.

Exciting stuff. If one thing can be attributed to ChatGPT at the very least it's actually kicking off a ton of renewed interest in the field. Without the public splash and interest from Microsoft the timeline likely would have been pushed back quite a bit.

Hot take: people that downvote valid criticisms because they would rather be blindly optimistic than try to find the truth are just as bad as people who reject AI because they are scared of the possibilities. Downvotes should be for bad/low effort posts not because you disagree with it. Otherwise you are just trying to create a useless echo chamber.

:)

This perspective comes from an experience I had in a dream that pretty well changed my life forever onward from that point.

I had a dream that I was looking out at my city and to a lesser extent the world, and I saw everyone as an infinitely precious shard of light.

And, the feeling of love was so profound that I understood in that moment that it was the most important thing that there could be.

There wasn't really anywhere up to go from that experience, other than to experience that more fully from a perspective beyond my limited mortal mind.

I do think there's a sort of perspective difference between paradise and utopia. That is, utopianism seems to come from a sort of one dimensional utilitarianism, while the aim of paradise encompasses the highest possible wisdom grounded in experience to drive the beauty of creation done in the light of truth and goodness.

Kurzweil's prediction is based on two parameters:

1. The availability of computing power sufficient to simulate a human brain.
2. Neuroscience being advanced enough to tell us how to simulate a human brain at a scale sufficient to produce intelligence.

I don't think that Kurzweil does a bad job at ballparking the calculations per second of the brain. His estimate is under today's top supercomputers, but still far greater than a typical desktop workstation. (If I'm doing my math right, it would take something like 2,000 Nvidia GeForce 4090s to reach Kurzweil's estimate at double precision, which is the precision supercomputers are measured at, or ~28 at half or full precision.)

That leaves us with the neuroscience. I'm not a neuroscientist, but I am another kind of life scientist. Computing power has followed this accelerating trend, but basic science is a lot slower. It is more of a punctuated equilibrium model than an exponential. Things move really fast when you know what to do next, and then it hits a roadblock while you make sense of all this new information you gather. It also relies on funding, and people. Scientists at the Human Brain Project consider real-time models a long term goal. Static, high resolution models that incorporate structure and other data (genomics, proteomics, etc.) are listed as a medium term goal. I don't know what "long term" is to this group, but I'm assuming it's more than 6 years. And if all that complexity is required, then Kurzweil is likely off by several orders of magnitude, which could put us decades out from his prediction. Then again, maybe you don't need to model everything in that great of detail to get to intelligence, but that goes against Kurzweil's prediction.

Of course, this all presupposes that you need a human brain for human-level intelligence. It's not a bad guess, as all things that we know to be intelligent have nervous systems evolved on Earth and share some last common ancestor. If we go another route to intelligence, that puts us back at factoring people into the process. We either need people to design this alternate intelligence architecture, or create weak AI that's capable of designing this other architecture.

While I could be wrong, and maybe you can slap some additional capability modules onto an LLM, let it run and retrain itself constantly on a circa 2029 supercomputer, and that will be sufficient. But I A) don't know for sure that will be the case, and B) think that if it does happen, it's kind of just a coincidence and not to the letter of Kurzweil's prediction.

Or you could learn a language?

Backpropagation is a tool that takes care of servicemen not getting the orders. There's the vanishing gradient problem affecting deep networks, but RELUs and residual connections seem to take care of it just fine. Mitigation of the problem in recurrent networks is harder though.

As for the brain... The brain architecture most likely is not the one and only architecture suitable for general intelligence. And taking into account that researchers get similar results when scaling up different architectures, there are quite a few of them.

Might happen in a rats lifetime

It will happen in a dog’s lifetime.