Recent comments in /f/singularity

MarginCalled1 t1_jaqe6yb wrote

Reply to comment by Clarkeprops in Figure: One robot for every human on the planet. by GodOfThunder101

We're also discovering new processes, materials, designs, and other factors that allow us to continue on the trajectory I mentioned. I'm actively involved in some of this work.

The primary issue is battery size and capacity, otherwise we would have robots such as those from Boston Dynamics already out completing limited work for us. As I mentioned batteries have been a heavy area of investment with a lot of advancements and options coming commercially in the next 2-3 years.

The secondary limiting factor is the ability of current LLM and AI programs. Also note that most labs have departments that use AI to help design, test and measure new products and services, and in some cases is able to write code based on a prompt and therefor as AI improves so does the technology that supports further advancement.

I'd be willing to bet my aforementioned numbers are very close estimates of where we will be at that time.

8

Surur t1_jaqcibs wrote

Reply to Really interesting article on LLM and humanity as a whole by [deleted]

That women is clearly biased, and ironically does not understand the singularity

> He’s also a believer in the so-called singularity, the tech fantasy that, at some point soon, the distinction between human and machine will collapse.

Ironically her mistake is that she misunderstands the language - we are talking about a mathematical singularity, not things becoming single.

It just shows that humans equally make mistakes when their only understanding is an inadequate exposure to a topic.

2

Surur t1_jaqcbpd wrote

Reply to comment by Slow-Schedule-7725 in Really interesting article on LLM and humanity as a whole by [deleted]

> In a recent paper, he proposed the term distributional semantics: “The meaning of a word is simply a description of the contexts in which it appears.” (When I asked Manning how he defines meaning, he said, “Honestly, I think that’s difficult.”)

This interpretation makes more sense, else how would we understand concepts we have never or will never experience? E.g. the molten core of the earth is just a concept.

1

Clarkeprops t1_jaqb7cl wrote

Reply to comment by MarginCalled1 in Figure: One robot for every human on the planet. by GodOfThunder101

Moore’s law used to be 18months, and the limitations of physics have caused the law to invalidate in terms of transistors. Quantum computing will likely revive the trajectory in spirit, but it’ll be wonky spurts and not a gradual incline like the last 50 years.

I really don’t think we’ll have useful robots available in 7 years. They haven’t even started building them let alone have that tech. A new iPhone takes a year or two to develop, and then 6 months to a year to build. And that’s like 100 grams. These things will be 200lbs.

I don’t think we’ll have useful robots for 20-30 years, but when we do, they’ll all come at once.

6

MarginCalled1 t1_jaqaokw wrote

Reply to comment by Clarkeprops in Figure: One robot for every human on the planet. by GodOfThunder101

Hardware is advancing at an exponential rate. Every 2 years, according to Moore's Law (historically accurate) the number of transistors on a microchip doubles resulting in your electronics being twice as fast to process new information.

At the same time software - more specifically AI - is advancing at a similarly exponential rate, doubling in ability/speed every 6 months on average.

Both of the above items are multiplicative to each other as they progress, resulting an massive jumps in processing power, and software improvements in short periods of time.

As an example if you look at some of the first console video games released (Mario, Duck Hunt, Transylvania, Excite Bike, etc) and then go search YouTube for "GTA 5 4k Ultra Hd Graphics" then click on the top one with a bike snippet and compare the graphics and depth of each it's nothing less than absolutely incredible.

Then throw in that in the same period we went from wired phone lines to a phone that can call, text, and surf the internet, and even speak to a program, tell it to create new art, stories, and recite the worlds knowledge to you plainly in your language and it will complete the entire process in less than 5 seconds.

I would say within the next 7 years we will have fully functioning human-like robots capable of most daily human tasks. I'd also guess that by this point a large amount of the human workforce will start feeling the effects of software eroding 'white collar' work.

The exponential nature of our advancement leads me to believe this is true. I would also like to note all the progress we are seeing in battery technologies and manufacturing discoveries. All three play a role with AI being the one that will most critically define the next phase of human life, whether we are extinct, in utopia or somewhere in the middle.

16

No_Ninja3309_NoNoYes t1_jaq7gl3 wrote

Reply to Figure: One robot for every human on the planet. by GodOfThunder101

You need exaflops, the equivalent of a million Nvidia GPUs. And the brain has to use less than a thousand watts. Even if you go full analog and hardwire with the current architectures, you will not succeed. Massive trimming, low precision, and probably forward forward instead of backprop is required. But that will likely only produce dumb robots with static microbrains.

It's much easier to train chimpanzees. Or create chimp cyborgs. Realistic spiking neural networks with neuromorphic hardware could get us robots, but it will take decades.

0

archpawn t1_jaq6ja9 wrote

Reply to comment by MeteorOnMars in Figure: One robot for every human on the planet. by GodOfThunder101

I feel like this could be taken two ways. One is that robots become so cheap and prevalent that everyone gets one. The other is that they're so good at doing different things that one per person is enough. You won't need one to vacuum your floor, one to mow your lawn, one to cook you food, and one to drive you around.

8