|
|
|
|
|
|
by TaylorAlexander
698 days ago
|
|
|
> AI closing in on general intelligence That’s what the hype men say, but increasingly I don’t believe it. I read yesterday that most major AI systems cannot correctly answer “which is larger, 7.11 or 7.9?”. Often I read of these strange examples, and struggle to remember each one or provide accurate examples when people challenge my claims that these systems still have many flaws. And fair enough. I’ve thought about that recently, and I think this is partly due to the fact that intelligence is a complex highly dimensional phenomenon, and failures in artificial systems manifest as all these weird little quirks and strange behaviors and failures and they are honestly hard for me to remember as an interested lay person. That said, these systems have loads of shortcomings, and in particular they’re not good at learning from small datasets which means they can’t easily generalize to humanoids (for example) doing the millions of little real world tasks humans do. And they can’t serve as general algorithms for all software problems. They work well with text and pretty well with images but I think we will find for a long time to come significant shortcomings that prevent them from really manifesting as a truly general intelligence. And I don’t know about this quantum stuff but until we actually solve AGI I don’t think we can really say with confidence what it takes to make intelligence function. |
|
|
It's largely irrelevant whether an AI system (say, GPT for example) can or can't correctly answer this number question. Many otherwise normal, socially functional humans would be stumped by it too though they without a doubt have self directed cognition and more or less the same sense of self awareness that you or I feel.
The real distinction with GPT or any known modern AI system is that it lacks that sensor of distinct self and its essential cognition, regardless of how well they do with number puzzles.
Something like GPT being largely able to pass the Turing test in the eyes of a human interacting with it doesn't demonstrate that the AI system has cognition, it instead evidently demonstrates that the Turing test was always a poor metric of advanced AI performance..