I love it! Next up, supporting wallet connect :)
Large Language Models Fail on Trivial Alterations to Theory-of-Mind Tasks is a paper that I recently tried to read and tried to recreate its findings and succeeded. Whether or not LLMs have TOM feels directionally unanswerable, is this a consciousness level debate?
However, I followed up by asking questions prompted by the phrase "explain Sam's theory of mind" which got much more cohesive answers. It's not intuitive to me yet how much order can arise from prompts. Or where the order arises from? Opaque boxes indeed.
Also consider including non-ML researchers in the actual org building. Project management for example, or other administration folks. People who've got experience in ensuring organizations don't fail, ML researchers need to eat, pay their taxes etc.
I posit that we've imagined basically everything available with known physics, and extended into theoretical physics. We don't need to capitulate to the ineffable of a superintelligence, known + theoretical capabilities already suffice to absolutely dominate if managed by an extremely competent entity.
I agreed with the conclusions, now that you had brought up the point of the incomprehensibility of an advanced mind, FAI almost certainly will have plans that we deem as hostile and are to our benefit. Monkeys being vaccinated, seems like a reasonable analogy. I want us to move past the "we couldn't imagine their tech" to me a more reasonable "we couldn't imagine how they did their tech"
I find this thought pattern frustrating. That these AI's possess magic powers that are unimaginable. Even with our limited brains, we can imagine all the way past the current limits of physics and include things like potential worlds if the AI could manipulate space-time in ways we don't know how too.
I've seen people imagining computronium, and omni-universal computing clusters. Figuring out ways to generate negentropy, literally re-writing the laws of the universe, Bootstrapped Nano-factories, using the principle of non-locality to effect changes at the speed of light using only packets of energy. Like what additional capabilities do they need to get?
FAI will be unpredictable in what/how, but we've already imagined outcomes and capabilities past anything achievable into what amounts to omnipotence.
the number of popular X in a human system Y:
Orbits just came to me, not sure if that counts a novel but I had never thought of them before as a stable equilibrium. They should stay the same unless perturbed by an outside force... but now that I think about it, pushes on an orbit are a permanent change. So I think that changes my answer to a non-stable equilibrium.
It feels to obvious, but fungible, replicable, commodities equilibrate sales price = MR.
Political environments should be stable as well until someone changes the system which created them. I'm labelling this as qasi_stable, they find a local minimum based on the rule set, but external forces can eventually break the system (see: all historical empires)
I have been thinking about the argument of the singularity in general. This proposition that an intellect sufficiently advanced can / will change the world by introducing technology that is literally beyond comprehension. I guess my question is this, is there some level of intelligence such that there are no possibilities that it can't imagine even if it can't actually go and do them.
Are humans past that mark? We can imagine things literally all the way past what is physically possible and or constrained to realistic energy levels.
I did encounter this problem (once) and I was experiencing resistance to going back even though I had a lot of success with the chat. I figured having a game plan for next time would be my solution.
This post and reading "why our kind cannot cooperate" kicked me off my ass to donate. Thanks Tuxedage for posting.