[minzi]

It seems like lots of people are pointing out the inadequacies of the current state of the art models. It doesn't seem that unlikely that many of these problems will be solved in the coming years. I won't make any guesses about timelines, but there is certainly a large number of very well funded smart people working on these problems. I'm not sure if this current path leads to AGI, which is what I would consider the minimum requirement for truly replacing human jobs. However, it does suggest to me that building AGI is achievable.

In my mind there are two major architectural problems that still need to be solved if I am to be convinced AGI is close:

1. Medium term memory

2. The need to relive an entire conversation just to produce the latest response.

Here is another question: Suppose we develop AGI. What will the energy requirements be for that system? The scale at which ChatGPT is used today would be peanuts compared to a system that is supposed to replace millions of knowledge workers.

[sadtoot]

i wonder how many of the commenters who bemoan how GPT-4 can't do this or that task, could have predicted 2 or 5 years ago what GPT-4 can do easily today

[fumeux_fume]

Yes I also only find people to be credible if they have a solid track record of magically predicting events 2 to 5 years in the future.

[olddustytrail]

That's the only way I'd find people credible when they're claiming they can predict 2 to 5 years in the future from now.

If they couldn't see ChatGPT coming, I'm not convinced of the whole "it'll never be able to..." spiel.

[sadtoot]

you should give it a try to be honest. metaculus.com

[minzi]

Yeah that is a much more succinct way to put it!