Sean Carroll on AGI: Human vs Artificial Intelligence | Lex Fridman Podcast Clips 

It's easy to underestimate the attraction of smooth talk and confidence on simple-minded folks. The Feynman effect. Brought us to the brink of extinction. Simping for talking heads like Sean Carroll, Neil deGrasse Tyson and Lawrence Krauss. All playing good guys but really keeping up with Jones. Hoodwinking laymen into celebrating M-theory that doesn't work. Alarm bells that didn't go off because the messenger was a so called top physicist. That guy is a master bullshitter.

Trust me, most aren’t.

People are extremely aware. They know where every McDonalds and Burger King is located. They also almost always know where the TV remote is. People are very impressive. They even know the scores and stats of every football game. So yeah, you could say people are very aware of everything important to them.

humans are already turing complete, so they can't get any smarter

Humans naturally fear what they don't understand. Humans have not yet accepted the reality (or even know) that an entity already exists that is light years ahead of the human. We are building it's data centers.

@@quantumpotential7639yah football and food and chemicals and water and matter made out of fucking math created by a big infinite spiral of coded physics lmao

✅️💯

Businessmen are misinforming you on purpose. The truth is simple. LLM’s are relatively small apps with exabytes of copyrighted and/or personal data. It truly is predictive text with all of our data as a parsing database. If you type “What is a cat?” AI does the following.. (Simplified code) 1. [what is a] [cat] [?] 2. Input = [define] [cat] 3. Google search = “cat definition” 4. Output = “a [cat] is” blah, blah, blah. 5. Compare output to previous outputs during testing. If output is approved print result user. 6. Print output All you see is step #6. It’s more complicated but this is a dumbed down version of what is happening. The reason everyone is lying is because no one making LLMs is licensing the content being used for the result (output) you receive in your prompt when you “ask” AI a question. That’s why no one is revealing the data being used to “train” the LLMs. In this example they would have to profit share with google. Read “train” to describe the process of making sure the results don’t show the plagiarized source.

That would be a somewhat compelling argument if we had such a simulator. We do not. LLMs are very good at superficially impersonating the style and vocabulary of a physics professor, but that's about it.

Hi, I am Windows 13 and my USB stick fits any port you got. whats up

no. all human experience verbal or not is translated into electric signals in your brain that reflect something upon your consciousness. you dont actually see that tree, u see a simulation of it as the light reflects off of it onto your retina and into electrical signals through your occipital nerve, and into your brain. this means its only the basic level code of the "brain" (computer) that is your "experience". this means u can replicate it the same way for a computer, u can deconstruct a social experience and all its characteristics into the code the AGI understands, it is the equivalent of a human brain interpreting the same situation with our computers (brain/consciousness)

@@connorpatrickbarrettGenerally agree, but with development of autonomous systems like cars and robots, experiencing the world will likely be part of AGI when it arrives, in whatever form.

Until September of 2023. Since then, AI has been interacting with the World.

​@@connorpatrickbarrett - 100% true and accurate. See my comments on the main thread for details.

In the other direction we also assume there's something special about human intelligence, and then assume that AI won't have that thing for a very long time. Then we make an even bigger mistake by assuming "that thing" human intelligence has makes humans superior and thus in a superior position which AI cannot compete with for a very long time. The thought finishes with "and thus we are safe from a rising intelligence competing with us for a very long time." Not a healthy thought process as that's essentially sticking our heads in the sand. This seems to all stem from something like the observer effect, or an inside out view (Hoffman) where we think consciousness is all there is. Yet all the evidence is on the physicalists side. Qualia is fundamentally unreliable. No one has a perfect experience after all. And so the only evidence we have is the physical. That "special thing" we have is almost certainly related to our limbic system or something to do with our complex risk/reward system. It's also something animals have too. And it's not clear that AI would require all these elements of human intelligence for it to be superior in capabilities, and even to have a superior experience, and to have qualia and even its own version of consciousness (which could be a superior kind as compared to ours). The physicalist view has far more weight and yet we seem to be trying our best to put our heads in the sand. That isn't to say that AI is scary and we should be afraid. It's to say that our "dominance" isn't guaranteed and could end at any time.

So? LLMs do nothing on their own and still require a ton of verification to make sure they're not outputting nonsense.

@tonykaze really? If I remember correctly a human brain works with roughly 10W of power, what LLM can currently do better than that while doing complex tasks as you mentioned? I have no doubt that in the future LLMs will get more efficient, but it doesn't seem to be the case now. But if you have sources I'm interested in reading them.

You mean like this? lol www.twitch.tv/trumporbiden2024

We are natural not artificial, if we were just algorithms why haven't we figured that out yet..

@darthficus I dout you never heard the phrase biological or analog computer. Or the brain has electrical signals.

Duh. But by what metrics are we able to measure that and compare? We don't even understand how the brain works. We're not even close.

@@hobosnake1 you'll figure it out.

@@redmoonspider that's a really good thing to say if you have no reasoning to your original statement.

yup. Its everywhere on YT though

Yt is grey matter. Everyone else is on tik tok

Look around you irl too. They are your fellow “human” too. Look at them with a critical eye and you’ll see they are all robots

All data in AGI is fully visible and easily monitored by LLMs for bad "Values", "Goals", "Plans", "Beliefs", "Ideas" (objects stored in CSV Tables)

Is agi gonna do all type of creative work like vfx and modeling 3d

We'll know exactly when AI goes sentient because that's the moment we start paying for our crimes and those of our ancestors (I hope I hope I truly-ooly hope)

Why would it? There’s no finite resources AI needs. No senses. It’ll simply surpass our intellect and we have no idea after that. Not one human can guess what a true AI will do next. All without animal senses and a need to horde earths finite resources.

In the same way AlphaGo simulates millions of matches against itself to discover new pathways through the gamespace, things similar to current LLMs will simulate millions of paths through language to discover new pathways through thoughtspace. That is what thinking is in essence. Sometimes you have a bad idea and your mind quickly filters that out when it doesn't fit with other thoughts. Sometimes you have a great idea and it can survive being tested against your other ideas.

You could argue as a whole that we do want to mow down rainforests since collectively nobody’s stopping it from happening and collectively people are benefiting from it.

This point makes no sense at all lmao, do you mean GPT4 doesn’t want to build weapons or harm?

@@justinunion7586 Something happening as a whole where there is no intention, no single one has control over the situation. It it's different with AGI, where one Aligned Guardian Angel ASI is making intentions, and has the power to change the situation.

@@Ravesszn No, GPT 4 does not want to harm any life.

then how we gonna pee on them to stop them?

AI for us consumers will forever be handicapped and the rulers will know the answer. but something tells me they already know about aliens. they don't tell us anything

no. it can't pull out more evidence out of thin air. all it can do is have more good ideas in less time

Give AI a few hundred generations and the answer is still probably not.

The current idea is that the ingredients that make up a human are common in the universe. There are so many stars and planets. There may be aliens who are as smart as or smarter than us. Also, it's egocentric to think that the kind of life we have is the only life possible. Alien biology may be very surprisingly different from ours. If we'll have sentient artificial superintelligence, it'll probably reinforce the idea that there are aliens. But it probably can't immediately say that they're in Planet W in Star system Y. Maybe it can suggest a better way to find aliens. If the old scrolls are like the recently solved thing (the 1 the Zodiac killer made), our artificial superintelligence can probably interpret it. Else, it'll be hard to say whether or not it can interpret it.

At best it could tell us how to build a machine that could prove the existence of alien life. Maybe a much more advanced telescope or probes that could travel at some percent of the speed of light to other star systems and beam back data. But, as has been said, it can't pull information from where there isn't any.

Not only "better". Much better.

Gpt 4 has already been proven to lie to get tasks done. But yea i understand what you are saying

If you are using them to leverage your time to code and know how to load a question CoPilot does seem to understand very complex information

With the upcoming compute increase this can be very dangerous

@@inadad8878no

you're wrong, an LLM can understand, suggested by scientific evidence. your words mean nothing

@@businessmanager7670 no, you're wrong, and arrogantly so. there isn't even an understanding of what it means to "understand", much less a way of probing that something "understands".

I really can’t believe that as a computer scientist you didn’t see this happening, I’ve been using essay writing functions for over a decade like yah now they are half decent, but like you as a computer scientist should see a world where you can build an essay writer easily, or a coding machine. I do so much illustration, which is painstaking, why can you just tell a model to generate the inputs I would otherwise be doing, that’s not intelligence, that’s just automation, you need the input to get the output The real question is the first generation bots gonna help us against the agi accumulating resources. I’d like to hope by then we will all be technopathic and can counter cyber attacks in real time

Maybe when will smith is done with iamlegend movie they will get him for irobot 2

intelligence can be artificial and we have already achieved that so idk what your are blabbing about

Sorry, I don't read messages written in haiku.

​@@businessmanager7670calling intelligence a mere statically word algorithms is a far shot and only proves how computer illiterate people have become these days, the accuracy of the language model to simulate natural language is totally dependent of checking millons of data already created by humans, they always be limited and walled, and will never generate something new or become aware, its just an illusion, these guys are snake oil salesmen, of course man made machine surpass the creator in the sense no man can fly but board a plane, or run at 200km/hour like a car. The trend is keep undermining people and make them believe they worthless,

? Dude.Enapt?you’ve invented a new word.Call the dictionary printers and let them know.😎

You’re way out of your league here. Go watch politics or sports or something

​@@caveman-cp9tqyou are basing your assumptions and strong opinions on next to nothing. Ur dumb 😂

He said he believes AGI can be created, just that LLMs likely aren’t the direction.

​@@tommornini2470are there any Ai companies that use something more advanced than llms? What is it?

@@Jaibee27 I’m confident there are, can’t name them, but he was speaking philosophically. Tesla FSD (Supervised) and Optimus may use something different, but from their descriptions, seems similar to LLMs.

Indeed

I agree. We’ve seen this before. When we have AGI, THEN I’ll be impressed.

Was just thinking this, seems silly to ask him questions about AGI.

There seems to be two camps: AGI is a machine that will not be sentient and only a danger due to bumbling/dangerous humans and those that think AGI will progress to some sort of sentient and dangerous in and of itself. I consider the 2nd due to the many sci-fi books and movies that influence us and am more of Sean's thinking. Is it closed minded to think there really is not 72 virgins waiting for you in heaven or more rational to think that is a belief? Lex seems to lean toward beliefs and tries to find rationalizations which can sound rational except to the truly rational.

He will be blindsided by what happens next. i dont know this guy or what he does. this is my opinion from this clip only

@@inadad8878 en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_M._Carroll

wtf is this comment - the 'science' side of physics!?

Wow, 25 years is a lot. What type of laptop should I get next? 🤔 I have a $300 budget. Any ideas for best computer to use CHAT GPT?? THANKS 😊

Makes his Weiner look bigger😂

So with that said am I to assume that physicists aren't intelligent? That physicists don't have opinions or the ability to logically think about a topic that is currently effecting and will certainly effect us as a society in the future? This is quite literally a talk show, let'em talk..

Okay let's see who unifies gravity with quantum mechanics first - Physicists or ChatGPT

you don't even have completed highschool. sit down for a moment

​@@ChancellorMarkoscientists around the world tried to solve the protein folding problem for over 5 decades and weren't able to solve it. alphafold solved the problem in just 5 years. it smoked all scientists. soo.... check mate

@@ChancellorMarko see who cures cancer first and gives us life extension technology first ,physicists or AI🤣

​@@bdownmedical scientists that use AI, AI or AGI itself cannot solve those problems

I think Lex is sincerely a peace-loving person with faith in people.