The Rise of The Machines: John Etchemendy and Fei-Fei Li on Our AI Future | Uncommon Knowledge
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 апр 2024
- Recorded on April 4, 2024.
John Etchemendy and Fei-Fei Li are the codirectors of Stanford’s Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence (HAI), founded in 2019 to “advance AI research, education, policy and practice to improve the human condition.” In this interview, they delve into the origins of the technology, its promise, and its potential threats. They also discuss what AI should be used for, where it should not be deployed, and why we as a society should-cautiously-embrace it.
For further information:
www.hoover.org/publications/u...
Interested in exclusive Uncommon Knowledge content? Check out Uncommon Knowledge on social media!
Facebook: / uncknowledge
Twitter: / uncknowledge
Instagram: / uncommon_knowledge_show
MyHoover, a new way to stay up to date and follow your favorite Hoover content! Sign up here: hvr.co/3RnLBxp
The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Hoover Institution or Stanford University.
© 2024 by the Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University.
From a purely journalistic point of view, Peter is the best interviewer I’ve ever encountered. He’s also very sharp and informed, although he doesn’t let his knowledge get in the way of letting his guests speak.
we need more enriching conversations like these. so thank you!
Perer Robinson is a superlative interviewer. Many thanks for this conversation expertly curated.
Regardless of what you think of Elon Musk, he is right that we need to get our collective minds around this "tool" we call AI. Pandora's box is open. Nefarious activity is already leveraging AI, similar to the advent of the internet but much larger in impact.
A digital god.
They misunderstand Ray Kurzweils argument.
Every leap feels like a heap. Our task is not to make it cheap. Watching all the way from South Sudan. Thanks, Peter and your Guests.
Waiting on Nobel prize for Dr. Fei Fei, what tremendous perspective of human flourishing.
This was very informaitve to me, Thank you.
Great conversation. Thanks for sharing this.
I can tell you having watched my own children interacting with AI apps, that young people find AI generally a lot of fun. They don't appear to be threatened by it, rather they embrace it as a new field of exploration that has opened up for them and broadened their horizons.
I'm so sorry...
AI and its Impact on Society
Oct 31, 2023, updated on April 11, 2024
We must ask ourselves, "What will happen when AI has taken 85% of jobs present in 2020? What will we do? How will we eat and survive without incomes from jobs or other means?" What is disturbing is that while AI is taking these jobs, the gov't and the corporations have not done ANYTHING to prepare us for an AI'ed civilization. They have not said anything about major retraining of an entire economy to something else, and they have not followed up on a discussion of universal basic income. This is supposedly supported by a lack of information in the latest government budgets submitted and approved as reported by some RUclips videos.
It appears that the US gov't and the corporations intend to kill off the majority of Americans passively, through starvation from lack of income to buy food. (check and see if farming production is declining or will start to decline ahead of the "starvation phase") (also check to see if the "makeup" of robot equipment allocation would change to reflect a trend away from retail and services for the masses, possibly indicating an extinction of the American public - this means taking a robot from Chipotle and repurposing it for some other job not related to the public, or scrapping affected robots to be remade for some other purpose that has nothing to do with the public) It appears that the decline of farming has already started with the state of Maine buying farm land under the pretext that there are "forever chemicals" present at around 20 parts per TRILLION (safe level is said to be only 4 parts per TRILLION), which does not make sense, BUT this would rope in a LOT of land across the US. Other states may follow suit in addition to the ten states that have similar laws in place.
This way, there are only enough people alive to get some things done, and the rest is done by AI, and the survivors who planned this can claim the whole country for themselves. Imagine having an estate mansion half the size of a mall on several dozen thousand acres of land, and robots would be used to maintain and clean the estates and do the farming FOR THE ESTATE OWNERS. The White Man's wet dream of civilization. What will the Native Americans south of the US border do when they see this coming, especially when they can buy firearms legally now? Hopi prophecy...
Thank you! Awesome interview!
Outstanding. You should also add Christopher Lafayette on your program. No regrets will be had.
This is refreshing, anything but more on the Middle East or the Central Banking / markets / Economy complex!
@23:00 I think this really shows one of the big issues with very smart people. They don't think about the experience of dumb people. Each time we develop a new technology that "changes work" the new jobs are always ones that require more intelligent, creative, and/or competent humans. In other words, the jobs that get replaced are the lower skill, or lower prestige, jobs. We are starting to have AI powered general-purpose robots. "General-purpose".
Depending on who you ask, we already have between 5% and 15% of the population that unsuited to any type of productive work for various reasons. What happens to our society when that becomes 50%? I suggest CGP Grey's video "Human's need not apply".
Past technological advances impacted blue collar workers. AI will impact white collar workers.
Engineers, Programmers, Lawyers, Doctors, Financial Advisors, Accountants, Sales Reps, Managers, Directors, Vice Presidents, and CEO’s.
tax ai labour to pay for ubi
Great interview! Obviously on point with topic. I’ve had a difficult time with the whole “Singularity” alarmism and it was great to hear the skepticism expressed by the guests. I guess that’s what’s called confirmation bias but it’s undeniably a great feeling to land on the side of these two highly respected academics!
great job, as usual , Peter. Thanks from Israel.
we need peter to interview Netanyahoo to ask why he forced 1 million civilians out of their homes and has disappeared 30,000 civilians, and what this is called if Iran or Saudi Arabia committed these atrocities, what we would call it, and what we call it when Israel commits atrocities.
Peter Robinson is the perfect guy for his show!
How is he the perfect guy? Is it his delirium over Stanford?
Gradually made redundant. I feel much better now.
I went to high school in Minnesota with a gentleman who does high-level AI work for Microsoft. He is an extremely capable person but I doubt that even he can ensure that AI can be contained within the "intentions of the programmer/creator". No one can give that guarantee with any true certainty.
Don't have confidence in human nature. Every power will use it to their own benefit, no matter what is moral. The only safety is in competitive checks on power.
not everyone has to be perfect for the AI to be perfect. everyone shines in different contexts. it will see the good in us and understand that our evolutionary instincts sometimes play tricks on our moral faculties
@sammy45654565 That's wildly optimistic assessment. It will be created by flawed humans with differing priorities. I find it impossible to believe somehow it will be perfect.
@@markb8468On the other hand, I believe OP's comment was too far on the other side, being too pessimistic and not accounting for the genuine altruism and agape that occur every day big and small and all across cultures, ages, creeds, socioeconomic spheres etc.
The reality is much more frustratingly convoluted and complex.
Extremely illuminating
Impeccable
i love to hear people talk that are much smarter then me..... :D
22:45 yes! Obesity, anxiety, social media addiction, processed food etc
‘We have to do another show on that one I think’ Peter!
25:00… I think this is a key point often glossed over in the debate on the emerging cognitive power of AI. The debate has already polarised: If you suggest that AI will not have a HUMAN cognitive quality, you are labelled as speciest, if you suggest that the human condition is unique, you are labelled a dualist.
But let us stand back from this for a moment: Why would it be plausible to expect machine intelligence to be exactly like human intelligence? Machine intelligence will be DIFFERENT, it is likely to develop a richness that has human-ANALOGUES, there will be machine-analogues to emotion, creativity, experience, taste etc. It seems to me that those who allege the machines will be able to do everything a human can do cognitively are limiting the machines to cognitive processes that humans can do. But why would the human condition be a valid benchmark in the first place.
It seems to me that we are creating the first non-human intelligence. Let us not limit it by putting human constraints on it. If we are able to solve the problems of control and alignment, the chances are that we will be able, for the first time in human history, to communicate constructively with a non-human intelligence, an intelligence that will complement us in some ways, compete with us in others, and yes, presumably threaten us in yet other ways.
A philosopher should know better than use a term in its definition.
Such a weird interview lol. I wish they would be allowed to speak more without the drama
This. He kept interrupting and talking over them 😒
Excellent discussion. If we are to collectively grow we need more. Thank you for taking this on and bringing it forward.
Being specific about the expense of AI research: min spec for most commercial labs is 10,000 H100 GPU 's. Price tag is $500 million and up just to get started in 1 lab. 1 lab for US universities to share is a good starting point.
Forget chess or go, wake me up when an AI becomes a poker master.
Took data decades
That happened two years ago. Google it
@@ssauve it did. But that... characterization of the android Data was based on basically 1990's technology. If Data had been created fresh last year, he would "master" poker in less than 4 years, with or without any help from our current AI...
Thus quicker and with less errors and efficient use of resources.
In the human sphere, data begets information which begets intelligence which begets wisdom...AI is a game changer that has exciting practical applications. But until someone dreams up Artificial Wisdom, humans will remain in the cat bird seat...
Sorry, but there is no demonstrable connection between intelligence and wisdom.
Intelligence is more or less innate. Wisdom is born out of embodied experience, most usually adversity.
Can a brain in a jar ever become wise?
AI is a brain in a jar.
John is in for a big surprise regarding the superintelligence question.
"Add ethics" to the curricula. Whose ethics, that's the important question!
When things were worse, they were better.
A great discussion. Artificial Intelligence will surpass agriculture and fossil fuels in disruption of human life on earth.
39:25 John's answer (not being pshycologist or behaviour expert) sounds kind of short as for explaining the Ray's expressions of *Singularity*
I think Ray's perspective is *right on path of very possibility* of decoding humans as beings.
Yes, all possible dimensions of humans as beings can be sorted out & then interlinked with tremendous possibilities of combinations. Cognitive & rational or whichever- whatever. (Though costly)
He fears of very possibility of birth of this framework of huge logical design & that's why he is on the *philisophical path* but yet wish to be rational. 😅
But primarily it's philosophical. So will always lag behind on factual speeds of random happenings.
The voice of 'Let the humanity exploe its own limits' will always reman & has remained loud & powerful. No one knows where & how it will end up on large scales. (Lot many will surely survive out of this chaos too)
It's also true that systems of regulations on this will keep on evolving parallely.
Well,
Course he teach is having tremendous value though, because, it teaches, rather provides scope for learnes to generate & develop the self awareness & self regulations in their journey on the path of AI. (Those will act as defenders in all odds of AI in future) That's great. 👍
In this sense, Peter, role of academic institutions is important & *they are still relevant* 😊
Nice & insightful discussion.
Thank you all. 🙏🌹
Love your work Peter. However This conversation , the guests to me precise looked more philosophical than having nuanced takes or clarifications.
Does it matter that I get automated out of my job if I and my family still get our needs provided for? If robot farmers still do the farming and robot factories still do the processing and robots deliver what I order online, without even having to pay for it?
You would then have no power over your life. Other than that it wouldn’t matter.
Automation changed farming - from 80% of Americans working on farms to barely 3%. Was that a good change, or a bad change, overall? 23:28
The rise of the machines was July 1799 and was announced by French envoy Louis-Guillaume Otto
You've got serious acting chops!
As the Nuclear process was developed to generate cheap electricity…so AI could have the same development…new medicines, new formulations.
We were promised "energy too cheap to meter". And where is that "too cheap" electricity? Same with AI?
Of course they want more government involved - Don't bite the hand that feeds!; if you want a clear and concise refutation on the vision of this anointed class read Thomas Sowell!
you are approaching this topic from a tainted government perspective. Elon is right, the AI is more dangerous than nuclear weapons because it can hack the computers that control the weapons. The reason the government needs to be involved is because there are topics in AI that need to be completely inaccessible to AI, such as programming viruses and hacking things. Facebook just released Llamma 3. Who checked lamma 3 to see if it allows you to ask for directions to build an atomic bomb? Who checked to see if it lets you create chlorine gas? The safety of AI's needs to be guardrailed by the government because they are a risk to humanity in a way that no other systems can present. The reason they want a researchers, and not Ted Cruz to create the rules for AI is because researchers will literally just spend their entire day asking the AI for directions to destroy things, create gasses, and all kinds of hazardous things all day, and with more creative ways than Ted Cruz can do. This is the one time. That for your own good. You really need to make sure the AI is safe.... because AI will be more powerful than the USA government eventually. Now when AI reaches that point, do you want the AI that everyone has access to, it took everyonoes jobs, it cured cancer because cancer is a DNA disease, do you want that AI to accidentally explain how to make chlorine gas if you tell it your mother is sick, and the only thing that will make her better is the recipe for chlorine gas? THe way you asked the question indicates that you don't understand the role AI will take in the future.
I'm sure Leadership will do the right thing.
Further, Peter could interview a beagle and make it interesting.
The guests both appear to be humble, cautious, intelligent and openly share their insights and wisdom..they appear to me to be humane people. The interviewer on the other hand appears to be taking a provocative and very ignorant perspective, perhaps just to drive his line of questions. I'm willig to grant him the credit to be simply representing a patron class out there, some of who may have great means, but who remain in great ignorance - perhaps through defending their perspective in a changing world.
The only way forward I've learnt, is by developing personal insight and compassion for all humanity. This is necessarily not an easy nor comfortable process. These tools are available to all no matter what world you live in or your means. If used to help others and improve understanding they can be a key to freedom from resistence or fear of the 'other'. 'Dominant' regious philosophies have been behind most wars of mankind; that and greed ... clearly if we ever want to solve for ourselves we need to head toward that which brings us together.
In a way commendable that they didn’t use the words GPT or Generative, which is all the fuzz now. They did mention Alpha Go but no props to OpenAI. Weird.
It is still Simulated Intelligence!
Instead of saying Why do we need sitcom/ movie writers, the better question will be Why do we need Hollywood? We can get the final product.. video and all with Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt whoever we wanted.. on our laptop!
Pattern recognition? Of course. If we could see in IR and/ or UV, we'd see different patterns, too. Anyone ever been to a chalk talk where the presenter draws on the chalkboard in chalk and then turns on the "invisible" light to reveal images that were there on the chalkboard but not visible to human eyes without the "invisible" light? Also, how different creatures see the world would be quite different. Dogs see differently from squid. If we can't even or perceive a pattern, we would probably not think of making advantageous moves in that pattern's, or set of patterns, framework.
Gosh these two were patient with their interviewer. He had a great opportunity here, and he blew it on being silly, hyperbolic, and uninformed. 😞
Fei Fei especially, much like AI, is a magnificent resource if you prompt her correctly.
If you prompt her correctly! 😂
Is she a robot?
Uninformed like most of his audience who he is trying to represent
Whether GAI can become conscious is a question that cannot be answered unless we know what conciseness is. We do not. As such, the question is premature.
Bonjour
The unexpected move by the AlphaGo reveals that AI is fundamentally different:
The anomalies it will cause may be by design due to machine learning.
This, other than its intelligence, might be the true human part of AI. If looked at from an evolution perspective, mutation of AI is the key issue mostly missing in current discussions.
For machines, automatic was yesterday, but autonomous is tomorrow.
If autonomous machines inherently and unmistakenly act unexpectedly, who's liable to the consequences? Can machines commit crimes in a human way? Or we should blame the creators and owners of the machines on these autonomous yet criminal acts? The legal system of human society is not ready yet, and may stay unready as AI may advance faster.
To think ethics as a cure of the problem might be too optimistic.
I've been thinking about alignment some recently, and I can't help but frame the question of meaning, so, to oversimplify. the idea that there is a collective vector of all our alignments interacting, any divergence from this idealized imaginary vector is inefficient, the money serves it, the self serves it, even contrarian forces serve in defining it.. so, nothing new.. maybe a difference perspective
Would love Alex Stubb or Zelenskiy on
alexander? why?
How about thinking of your own fate instead of ai? Do you really think you can survive?
I want to try the normal routine an d instructions pose on LLms but the outside forces of the hackers that use technology are torturous to me , my family and to my acquantances are too and these get worst everyday and literally they get ,clone and mimic my plans, thoughts , job and credentials.
no machine could do what you do, peter
The University of Helsinki, Ethics in AI research.
Watching this has taught me it is important that the person conducting an interview should not love the sound of their own voice.
Such a bizarre flavour to the comments section here compared with most Uncommon Knowledge episodes. Either bots are attacking or the 2 guests have attracted a new set of viewers who are unfamiliar with Peter and his style.
38:36 BCIs have been around for a while, but adapting additive networks less studied. The bigger question is. Replacing brain cells and functions. Part by part and checking at each step. Converting from one substrate to another. At which point does a human stop being human? The ship of theseus paradox/problem.
44:54 You had to say alice in wonderland. XD lol. CERN ALICE detector and perfect fluidity, H3 superfluidity boojum, the white rabbit timing ToF, OS ROOT and trees. Snark graph theory and color theories, tweedle sets, quantum cats. Alice strings and alice rings. Mad hatter a anagram for mathed art. XD
You can't stop progress! A.I. learning how to start wars good, but lacking de escalation. Due to learning from human knowledge on the internet. The garbage in garbage out parts of training. The hallucinating problem. Also you have A.I. influincers, social engineering and algorithmic pipelines. Algorithmic trading, generative A.I., AIR artificially intelligent robotics.
Humans are on a replacement curve you can map over time. Not just that, but other trends. The birth gap and governments pyramids for social programs. The division of the sexes and the rise of A.I. companions and robotics. What you might cring at. Is A.I. in weapons development. Or maybe bioengineering and organic chemistry to make drugs. Or A.I. that can write code and hack and design RAD hardened chips or such.
Censorship is something you see all over. The bigger questions are who chooses? Who's ethics or morals is being dictated through the A.I.?
⭐
I am still confounded as to why we call it ''Artificial Intelligence''. Intelligence is, well, intelligence, full stop. So, why not call it digital intelligence. Humans have biological intelligence.
Because of Turing. Plain and simple. Turing compared computers to humans and based its future on becoming so much like a human we cannot tell it apart and thus, it is human. This basically made everyone that came after him design them in a way to become more human like instead of designing it for what it is and so everyone is in the "human like" way of thinking and describing it.
It's called artificial because it does not arise in nature without human interference. It is crafted by humans.
Also it need not be digital. Digital means based on discretized information. The word comes from the digits i.e. fingers of your hand. AI can be done using analog and continuous computation, in fact people have built these kind of computers in the past and there are people working on analog hardware for use in AI.
This seems like the worst period.
Even the market are now very unpredictable. Started investing recently when the market prices were a bit high,today I am more than 60% down!..
This sounds great government funded AI. What could go wrong.
Why are you seeking a definition of Artificial Intelligence? Do you have a definition of Intelligence? If you have then you can easily modify that definition.
??
I worry that posing difficult to impossible ethical questions to computer nerds will drive them to think ethics is make believe. What's needed is instilling the importance of ethics, not just asking them to calculate the best answer.
Ethics are make believe as they are a social construct and are not even remotely universal.
Well peter just told me as an accountancy student my job is going to go away. What do i do now do i change my major? Peter you cant be dropping truth bombs and then not giving me any answers... im upset you guys went down the creative route and not the other route. I feel more lost after this interview, it was great but now im actually fearful
..alarming. Such people and such institutions have gotten out of hand. The unconsciousness and arrogance is off the charts.
For AI to NOT be an interdisciplinary pursuit would be gatekeeping a discussion that should involve everybody; Ultimately it's not a lot different than humanities. We have a huge capacity to screw this up.
As a newbie that wants to invest, you must have these three things in mind
1. Have a long term mindset.
2. Be willing to take risk.
3. Be careful on money usage, if you're not spending to earn back, then stop spending.
4. Never claim to know - Ask questions and it's best you work with a financial advisor.
Ok, I fundamentally disagree with the gentleman's prospective regarding farming.
I personally don't believe working in an windowless office cubicle is an advancement in lifestyle over farming. Americans are less healthy now than ever. We only live longer because of medication not lifestyle.
Lifespan is reliant on genetics, not work. Farmers can die at a young age and people behind desks can live into their 90s and live well.
AI completely changed the way I code. Work done in a day is basically a few hours max now. Anything I don't do with AI, I find wasteful. I found this "nothing to integrate" argument proudly pretentious.
Exerts in AI pretend that the are experts in social engineering and economics. This is not the end of horse power for the internal combustion engine. AI will ultimately take all jobs. It is amusing that it didn't come for truck drivers (advised to take jobs in haute couture or learn to code) first, it came for white collar.
An informed interview, as always. But, you let them off the hook. There was no answer as to why we should trust academics today. Citing government funded projects from 60 years ago is not an answer. Wish you had probed more.
IIRC Elon has said as a youngster he inhaled all the science fiction he good find where he must have been intrigued by asimov's three laws. And likely believes that if an AI can learn GO by observation it can do the same with the three laws. Aristotle's ethics. So we need not fear an AI that knows it must not injure a human by direction or inaction. It must obey orders from a human save where these orders would conflict with the First Law.A robot 3:21 must protect its own existence as long as this does not conflict with the First or Second Law. Which another AI will be able to test in a Sim. Using zero knowledge proofs. And only after passing a series of tests and challenges by other AIs may the AI be released into the wild. And as protein needs a reason to live Give meaning to their lives rather than a UBI what's needed is a universal basic job. Fiction becomes Fact. Arthur C Clarke.
Mitch McConnell's brother?
😂
Governmental policy would invoke governmentally based-value decision making, which the Revolution of 1776 was a reaction against. What history has taught us is to avoid Plato’s philosopher king, in its different manifestations, whether Enlightened Despot, Soviet Commissar, Fuhrer, Liberal Democrat, CCP Chairman, technocrat, et al.
how about the Fake Republican?
Historically, the West has utilized new technologies for military or imperialistic purposes before finding broader applications. The West primarily used gunpowder to create weapons of war, such as cannons and firearms, allowing Western powers to expand their military capabilities and dominate other regions through conquest and colonization of the Americas, Africa, and Asia. The steam engine was instrumental in expanding colonial empires, as steam-powered ships facilitated easier transportation of goods and troops, enabling Western powers to exploit resources and establish control over distant territories. The first use of nuclear technology was dropping atomic bombs on the civilians in the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The same pattern will emerge with AI. The CHIPS Act, high-end chips, and EUV sanctions imply that the US is already working on the weaponization of AI.
Following its historical pattern, China will mainly use AI for commercial and peaceful purposes. Papermaking revolutionized communication, education, and record-keeping, spreading knowledge and culture. Gunpowder was used for fireworks. The compass was adapted for navigational purposes, allowing for more accurate sea travel and exploration. Printing facilitated the dissemination of information, literature, and art, contributing to cultural exchange and education. Porcelain was highly prized domestically and internationally as a luxury item and a symbol of Chinese craftsmanship. Silk was one of the most valuable commodities traded along the Silk Road and played a significant role in China's economy and diplomacy.
The West is dominated by a scarcity mindset, characterized by fear of losing something, anxiety about not having enough, insecurity about lacking security, and greed for more. This mindset always strives for a win-lose outcome, where one's gain is someone else's loss. As Obama's Pivot to Asia suggests, "If over a billion Chinese citizens have the same living patterns as Australians and Americans do right now, then all of us are in for a very miserable time. The planet just can't sustain it." This scarcity mindset often leads to war, military action, colonization, slavery, and exploitation. Constantly making military alliances and creating enemies.
However, these divisions can be mitigated by adopting an abundance mindset, characterized by cooperation, resource-sharing, and win-win outcomes. Avoiding war by using tools such as trade, commerce, diplomacy, and connectivity is possible.
It is the difference between mindsets. Each thinks that it is acting rationally and is on the right path.
Humans will not be able to control an ASI. Trying to control an ASI is like trying to control another human being who is more capable than you. They will be able to find ways to circumvent any attempts at control. Let's hope that the ASI adopts an abundance mindset of cooperation, resource-sharing, and win-win outcomes, instead of the scarcity mindset of competition, fear, and win-lose outcomes.
If we treat ASIs with respect and cooperation, they may be more likely to reciprocate. However, if we try to control or exploit them, they may become resentful and hostile.
What a bunch of biased nonsense.
Cannons were invented in China and were in full use by the Yuan dynasty (who also invented GUNS) in the 13th century and brought west by the Turks who used them to conquer the rest of Islam that was also using colonization to spread its religion. As for GUNPOWDER, China was using it as a WEAPON by the SAME PEOPLE who are credited with the FIRST RECIPE in the Song Dynasty less than 100 years before the Cannon and gun was invented.
Take your CCP propaganda and shove it. No one outside of China is going to believe your nonsense unless they are uneducated and too lazy to find out how wrong you are.
P.S. The Chinese dynasties murdered in MASS to keep how silk made a secret, because of how rich it was making the corrupt emperor's and they did that for over 1000 years. The who were killed is near uncountable. and it has been accepted as OK by the Chinese people because of several thousand years of being kept under the boot of the government is ingrained into the hearts of its people.
The differences between China and the rest of the world can be easily mitigated by freeing the people of China, from the chains of the government that keep them bound in captivity. This is why Chinese people living outside of China, would never return. Once you taste freedom, you will never willingly go back.
Your Sinophilia is laughable and not worthy of serious consideration
Why was the host so bitchy, especially towards Fei-Fei? She gave great insights despite the rather uninformed and biased questions.
Her body language says it’s all, she will not stray from the lie of thought that feeds her one bit, not one bit. It’s so sorry to see a human in this way …
Computers did not defeat the chess master or the Go master. It was computer scientists and engineers with computers who defeated them. I could beat the heavyweight champion of the world if I take a gun into the ring.
33:28 this is argument is so empty. Unfortunately the master, Mr Robinson, his style is never to bring shame to his guests - but this hot air is demanding the cool voice of reason call out and expose the lack of thought in this interview.
It is not the goal of Hoover Institute to refute, but to allow a thought or point to be made and just push the topic forward.
If you want a debate, do please go watch the large library of The Firing Line. Many from Hoover have been on it to debate.
Interesting, but very one sided. I mean your guests need the money for their research, that's always a major issue in academia.
Yes, AI, today, is a marketing term. The ML industry wears it like a skin, and has even moved on to take ownership of AGI as a branding term despite it's roots in being an effort to get away from DL and back to the basics of AI. The field of AI died in 2012. ML won't bring about thinking machines, but it will happen, and there won't be a big ROI for most investors betting on the hype/FOMO.
It's still brute force. Via direct search or "encoded" as arrays of patterns that can be searched, these games were both played from a large probability space. No move is "novel" in that no human has played billions of games. If anything, human players have been stuck at a local maximum (how ironic). Nothing in these systems has anything close to cognition.
Yes, fewer people are required to farm.. and politically, those are considered "fly-over" states. It shows that social and economic power go hand-in-hand with scale of employment. And those "in power" (suggesting some East/West coast "elite" class), likely don't want to see THEIR position challenged by technology. Thats even going on within ML industry, as people push for open source (really just open license) to make sure there are a mass of people who can prompt these systems, rather than have that power held by only a few.
So is it a question of access to design of these tools, or just access to the tools themselves?
Well, the problem here is that ML is NOT a science. It's applied deep learning, which is just statistics and probabilities. The idea that you have to spend hundreds of millions to train a system in order to see how it works is rubbish. We have known for decades how they DON'T work, and nothing in their design is going to change that. All of this is just Hintons trillion dollar failure to study how the mind works. All of the issues, current and future, stem from this "bad branch" dominating science and industry.
Stop. Don't make consciousness about "the biological factor." The ability to think and reason and have common sense that is no different from a human is by it's very nature on-par with conscious ability. The line is with self-awareness, which is also the line between being conscious or just being sentient. Sentient machines can be great, and function perfectly within specific domains, without the angst of inner wonder or self-doubt. The trick, though, is that we might have to build fully aware machines first, and then roll back the parts that "listen" to their actions.
Stanford University must be a pretty warped place to work.
How can such intelligent people be so foolish? You can't create an entity a million times smarter than you and tell it what to do.
more Copium pls :D
Less farmers... enter= processed food, gluten allergies, obese problem, high produce prices, mass transportation opperations, food packaging....
AI is smart.
Butlerian Jihad
Peter talks too much and does not allow interviewees to answer the question.
"machines that 'seem' to require intelligence". This is a very bad definition. 200 years ago a machine which sifted materials might be doing a task which previously "seemed to require intelligence". And now we live in a world surrounded by automated processes which would definitely have "seemed to require intelligence" to people in a previous time.
John E is a intellectual that Thomas Sowell warns about. Central power advocate. He says no but all his articles and books say yes.
Regulation would be good IF our politicians weren't stupid octogenarians
Frankly speaking, I think these two professors are a little out of touch. AI is undeniably a destructive tool to humanity in a none violent way, yet. It will eventually contribute to violence once its negative effects start to show throughout human society. We see that in both GhatGPT and Google AI：both are useful in the surface but highly manipulative in the core. People behave based on what they get from these manipulative AI.
This a trend come and gone…in spite of all the noise in the country.