Відео

Is this Neural hot air ? Or categorical theoretic mental circle jerk?

Love it ❤. (Also, happy to see Ken walk the minefield of politics without being sucked in to left vs. right.)

Ref "new way of thinking" .. Errr Hinduism and Buddhism assuredly knew this more than a few years ago.

I suggest you talk to normal people and show them examples of LLMs writing novel poetry on a bespoke topic before asserting that “most people wouldn’t say LLMs are truly creative.”

Life has been present since the origin of the Universe Evolution, Information and Golden Ratio The Route of Life One of the characteristics of living beings is their ability to store and manage information. Considering such a characteristic, it is possible to distinguish the following seven evolutionary milestones from the origin of the Universe: -Emergence of ”Seeds of Life”(1) (thirteen thousand eight hundred million years ago). -Emergence of LUCA (Last Universal Common Ancestor) three thousand eight hundred million years ago -Emergence of the brain (five hundred and fifty million years ago). -Emergence of what was the precursor of human language (2) (twenty-seven million years ago) -Emergence of the language that characterizes us(3) (around two hundred and twenty thousand years ago). -Emergence of “the information age” with the transistor (1950) -Evolutionary Singularity(4) proposed by Ray Kurzweil, who postulates that humanity will access a Singularity as a result of the exponential growth of information management (year 2045). Evolutionary sections Among successive evolutionary milestones we can distinguish the following six “Evolutionary Tranches”, with the duration indicated (in years): Tranche 1: 10,000,000,000 (13,800,000,000 - 3,800,000,000 = 10,000,000,000) Tranche 2: 3,250,000,000 (3,800,000,000 - 550,000,000 = 3,250,999,000) Tranche 3: 523,000,000 (550,000,000 - 27,000,000 = 523,000,000) Tranche 4: 26,780,000 (27,000,000 - 220,000 = 26,780,000) Tranche 5: 219,905 (220,000 - 95(5) = 219,909) Tranche 6: 95 (95 - 0 = 95) The ratio between consecutive evolutionary stages gives rise to what I will call “relative evolutionary speed between stages” (RES), resulting in the following five relative evolutionary speeds. RES 1 = 3.076923 ((10,000,000,000 / 3,250,000,000) = 3.076923 ) RES 2 = 6.214149 ((3,250,000,000 / 523,000,000) = 6.214149 ) RES 3 = 19.529499 ((523,000,000 / 26,780,000) = 19.529499 ) RES 4 = 121.779859 ((26,780,000 / 219,905) = 121.779859 ) RES 5 = 2,314.789474 ((219,905 / 95) = 2,314.789474 ) The logarithms of the relative velocities are as follows Log(RES1) = 0.488117 Log(RES2) = 0.793382 Log(RES3) = 1.290691 Log(RES4) = 2.085575 Log(RES5) = 3.364511 The ratio (Ri) between successive logarithms (Ri = (Log(RESi+1) / Log(RESi)) is the following: R1 = 1.625394 R2 = 1.626822 R3 = 1.615859 R4 = 1.613229 The above values differ from the Golden Number (1.618034), a number also called the golden number, the number of God, the extreme and average ratio, the golden ratio, the golden mean, the golden ratio and the divine ratio, by 0.45%; 0.54%; 0.13% and 0.30%, respectively. In turn, the average of the sum of the ratios is 1.620326. This value differs from the golden ratio by 0.14%. The results obtained allow us to postulate that Evolution follows a pattern that is a function of Information and the golden ratio. (1)The last universal common ancestor (LUCA) is the putative common ancestral cell from which the three domains of life, Bacteria, Archaea and Eukarya, originated. The complexity that LUCA is assumed to have does not give rise to affirming that it arose by “spontaneous generation”, it being valid to postulate the pre-existence of “seeds of life” prior to the emergence of LUCA; It is postulated that the origin of the “seeds of life” dates back to the moment when Matter arose in the Universe, that is, around thirteen thousand eight hundred million years. (2)“We find that the anatomical potential to produce and perceive sounds differentiated by their formants began at the latest by the time of our last common ancestor with Old World monkeys (Cercopithecoidea) about 27 Ma ago”; " Which way to the dawn of speech?: Reanalyzing half a century of debates and data in light of speech” (Science magazine) (3) The last change in the position of the hyoid bone in humans, which would have allowed access to the language that characterizes us, took place approximately two hundred and twenty thousand years ago, and its data is based on archaeological evidence and anthropological studies. There is no scientific source that records this change on an exact date. (4)Due to the exponential growth of information technologies, Ray Kurzweil postulates that a Technological Singularity will occur in the year 2045, at which time technological growth will be so rapid and so profound that it will be impossible to predict what its consequences will be. (5) It is the time between 1950 and 2045, the latter year in which Ray Kurzweil postulates that a Singularity will take place.

these prophetic talks need to be monitored , this is just creepy.. the saviour complex , etc , nothing new

First time listening to this channel. Pleasantly surprised by the richness of the discussion about empirical vs a priori vs naturalist knowledge. I just want to strongly recommend everyone in this space, engineer or philosopher, to check out Wilfrid Sellars and Sellarsian thinkers like Robert Brandom and Ruth Millikan. The applications of their concepts on intelligence discourse along everything from ontology to linguistics is highly relevant and well developed.

Still trying to figure out how this guy stays so buff despite being five magnitudes more nerd than me

Nice edits great hi-speed symmetry

Everybody can write the book. Can we see the system built by him based on what he says?

It still amazes me that AI has not found any cures to cancer or similar problems. They have all the data they need. Petabytes of MRI and Medical condition documentations. Why spend time on corner kicks and not medical side? I guess it is about funding or to put it better, the lack of funding if they decide to disrupt the already money making sectors.

All priors go out the window, unless you consider Homo sapiens winning out as a prior, then you know what will and must be done. It stems from whether or not you believe we are witnessing the creation of an intelligent subspecies. I do. PS: notice I didn’t say super intelligent. If it is ASI that’s been achieved in (relative) secrecy, we don’t even need to have these debates. You don’t need to adjust your doom clocks because such a thing cannot be stopped.

Unfortunately AI safety is an illusion at best.

I hope the hardcover is cheap 😅🥲

Thanks man, this is so beautiful ❤

Sounds evolutionary

Connor provides; all drama, no information, zero solutions. As connor would say, you need to work on your memetic hygiene.

I love this guy

Dr. please stop simulating old film imperfections with the charts. For me, it's highly distracting. I feel like a cat chasing a laser beam from the hand of an epileptic .

A year after this video came out and the AI hype is even worse. Microsoft and Meta declaring they'll spend $100 billion each over the next 5 years to build massive AI data centers and put AI in everything. Everyone jumping on the bandwagon with a severe case of FOMO.

RIP PROFESSOR ❤

Overall, I think Hotz did better here. His position is more optimistic and more reasonable.

too much talk outside of the interview.

It's kind of funny to watch two guys I could knock down with one finger debate the more rarefied dimensions of personal emancipation. This is why people like Andrew Tate have acquired a harder sort of credibility in these times; in the kind of winner-take-all situations discussed here someone like Tate would quickly assert himself over glib nerds espousing high-flown philosophies they couldn't possibly implement given the limitations of their physicality and life experience. I happen to like and respect both of these dudes as scholars and intellectuals, but they are way out of their depth talking about life in Somalia and Terminator-style scenarios.

It's good book! Thanks Chris!

awesome talk thanks!!

10:04 "Code is Data" is especially clear in Linear Algebra. A vector |v⟩ is data. A function is code. But a vector also canonically defines a linear function: x ↦ ⟨v∣x⟩.

I came to this video because of Wes Roth

There are negative forms of symbiosis, it has become quite a bad buzzword to use. Especially if we get VIKI.

1:14:20 Wouldn't Godels Incompleteness indicate that it's not possible to prove all facts of the universe from finitely generated axioms in higher order logic? Edit:Nvm, watched more

As long as humans and human artefacts are part of the AIs environment, we'll influence the AI. However, even in the case of Sydney, our influence wasnt intentional, and we weren't steering it in a purposeful direction. So our influence was irrelevant to whether or not it ended up doing what we actually wanted. So far, humans have always needed bacteria to survive. But we don't bend to their will.

Dude stop reading neuro"science" it's pretty dumb. I am a physicist and have been looking to how accurate different sciences are, and if physics and chemistry are pretty accurate, let's say 7/10" anything related to how humans work or behave is less than 4/10. Every 20-30 years we have to admit how stupid we were 20 years before. Your man sam that sounds smart is indeed like a gpt, he will tell you the dumbest shit in a very convincing manner.

140IQ on left, 115IQ on right

Connor is just consistently derailing the conversation with highly sensationalized and emotional retorts. Sure Connor, a random asteroid liquefying the earth would be bad. Let's act together right now to offset the earth by who knows how many kilometers in who knows what direction. That'll certainly prevent the inevitable doom of this liquefying asteroid that's totally going to come for us someday.

Does anyone else think that they both could be variants of each other? They both look like eventual outcomes from the same seed person.

2:07 so glad you mentioned Schmidthuber. 😅

"The dark side of the Force is a pathway to many abilities some consider to be unnatural” - 48:35

How many years away are we from "Lets replace human players with humanoids who can respond better to our AI tactical algorithm providing real time positioning, "velocity" and instructions"? Convince me the game will actually be better with all teams working through tactics generated by machines. We will arrive at a very bland brand of the game where everyone predicts each other and responds accordingly to a dire state - individuality will be punished, collective styles will be punished, unique team compositions will be punished. etc. Look at what Petar assumes coaches actually do - 17:09 - "It will free up coaches to do LESS of staring at situations and more of the actual creative and actionable decision making part" - He doesn't understand that creativity isn't something you arrive at, its the result of the very process that technology is replacing. Ask an artist if their creativity is truly manifested when they prompt stable diffusion to spit out 20 images in a minute OR when they spend 2 hours painting 1 image? The PROCESS is the creative part. The "Creative Decision Making" IS the result of the boring "Staring at situations" part - without that you might as well give a monkey 4 options to choose from and go from there. Also, Who would actually enjoy that sanitized version of the sport? Another case of technologists pillaging industries/fields they have no attachment or stake in (so they don't care what they destroy). They're doing it to art, doing it to sport....go solve real problems that are facing humanity - ecological crisis, affordable housing crisis, global energy crisis etc. instead of continuing to destroy the last remaining bastions of human existence & creativity. AI technologists are the human version of lemurs running us off the cliff. Ask how many technologists studied the humanities alongside their software development, statistics courses etc, next to none. This is why you have technologists who don't understand the social and human impact of the work they are pursuing, more importantly, why they don't care. Is the technology cool? Sure but just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.

Can I read this even I have no Idea about AI Engineering or coding? I don't even know calculus it seems it has a lot calculus inside the book I think couldn't understand it when I'll start reading this book btw I'm still interested to read this book because I've a plan to take AI engineering course.

This is a fascinating topic, but it's hard to focus because the greatest mystery is why he decided on that facial hair. I can see where he has stubble on his cheeks and further down his neck, so he could grow a full beard, but he's gone for a ridiculous looking chin strap. He needs to grow it on his cheeks, but most importantly his neckline is WAY too high and it's so bad it's actively distracting.

Every researcher on planet earth want the bitter pill to be false. What's more exciting: 1) get more data + GPUs 2) engineering smart solutions

Discussing a made up example (Paperclip) instead of understanding the concepts behind the example proves that he has not even undertstood the example in the first place. It hurts my brain to listen to the guy on the right. Why is he here?

Deep learning is hard?

After a month, I found that the conversations were too low quality, with a bit too much passive aggressiveness. For example, there’s a bot / troll with the fake name Phil, with a completely CGI avatar. People say weird things when they hide behind robotic avatars. From the Maven I saw, it will be a passing fad with a small cult following and no monetisation.

Wait! Do I lose something? We created the tool of deep learning, but we do not understand how and why it works?

The british engineer is spot on. Respect sir for your clear vision and clarification of the BS sold by Google marketeers.

Connor Leahy is the most distinct and acute voice in AI. Can't remember the last time I disagreed with him on anything he's said.

I am from Pakistan sir and a big fan of yours. Thank you for making this available for us in the third world

ethics is @ the end so teach people how to do it and then throw in the ethics interesting

Rest in peace, Professor Dennett, one of the greatest philosophers of all time. A modern-day Bertrand Russell.