Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

No_Ninja3309_NoNoYes t1_jdprlpp wrote

80% sounds like a wild stab. I second that current systems are not original. Sure, they can stumble on something unique, but anyone can if they try hard enough. And computers can combine items faster than we can. Some of the combinations might be meaningful, but AI doesn't really know because they have no model of the world.

I don't think we can say much about GPT 4 because OpenAI is secretive about it. But it can't be AGI unless OpenAI invented something extraordinary. If they did, they would be fools to expose it to the world just like that.

It looks like he's talking about neurosymbolic systems or RNNs. IMO we need spiking neural networks hardware. The architecture would probably be something novel that we don't even have a name for yet.

1

CaliforniaMax02 t1_jdr84pj wrote

I think if it doesn't replace 80% of the jobs, but 20-30%, our society will already be in serious trouble. And 20-30% is quite believeable.

5

Borrowedshorts t1_jdqyly5 wrote

80% is a wild stab just as any projection is a wild stab, but Goertzel has studied the problem as much as anyone.

1

lehcarfugu t1_jds3olv wrote

On the other hand, most progress and advancement is combining ideas. What combinations have we not considered?

1