Comment on [deleted]

• lengau@midwest.social ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Give it a few billion years.

  source

  • chuckleslord@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Realistic timeline

    source

    • ByteJunk@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Management would like to push up this timeline. Can you deliver by end of week?

      source

      • superkret@feddit.org ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        My wife did not react kindly to that request when she was pregnant.

        source
  • thedeadwalking4242@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    As unpopular as opinion this is, I really think AI could reach human level intelligence in our life time. The human brain is nothing but a computer, so it has to be reproducible. Even if we don’t exactly figure out how are brains work we might be able to create something better.

    source

    • dustyData@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      The human brain is not a computer. It was a fun simile to make in the 80s when computers rose in popularity. It stuck in popular culture, but time and time again neuroscientists and psychologists have found that it is a poor metaphor. The more we know about the brain the less it looks like a computer. Pattern recognition is barely a tiny fraction of what the human brain does, not even the most important function, and computers suck at it. No computer is anywhere close to do what a human brain can do in many different ways.

      source

      • barsoap@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        It stuck in popular culture, but time and time again neuroscientists and psychologists have found that it is a poor metaphor.

        Notably, neither of those two disciplines are computer science. Silicon computers are Turing complete. They can (given enough time and scratch space) compute everything that’s computable. The brain cannot be more powerful than that you’d break causality itself: God can’t add 1 and 1 and get 3, and neither can god sort a list in less than O(n log n) time. Both being Turing complete also means that they can emulate each other.

        Architecturally, sure, there’s massive difference in hardware. Not carbon vs. silicon but because our brains are nowhere close to being von Neumann machines. That doesn’t change anything about brains being computers, though.

        There’s, big picture, two obstacles to AGI: First, figuring out how the brain does what it does and we know that current AI approaches aren’t sufficient,secondly, once understanding that, to create hardware that is even just a fraction as fast and efficient at executing erm itself as the brain is.

        Neither of those two involve the question “is it even possible”. Of course it is. It’s quantum computing you should rather be sceptical about, it’s still up in the air whether asymptotic speedups to classical hardware are even physically possible (quantum states might get more fuzzy the more data you throw into a qbit, the universe might have a computational upper limit per unit volume or such).

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • Akrenion@slrpnk.net ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Some Scientists are connectiong i/o on brain tissue. These experiments show stunning learning capabilities but their ethics are rightly questioned.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • fckreddit@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      The only way AI is going reach human-level intelligence is if we can actually figure out what happens to information in our brains. No one can really tell if and when that is going to happen.

      source

      • thedeadwalking4242@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Not necessarily, human made intelligence may use separate methods. The human brain is messy it’s possible more can be done with less.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I somewhat agree. Given enough time we can make a machine that does anything a human can do, but some things will take longer than others.

      It really depends on what you call human intelligence. Lots of animals have various behaviors that might be called intelligent, like insane target tracking, adaptive pattern recognition, kinematic pathing, and value judgments. These are all things that AI aren’t close to doing yet, but that could change quickly.

      There are perhaps other things that we take for granted than might end up being quite difficult and necessary, like having two working brains at once, coherent recursive thoughts, massively parallel processing, or something else we don’t even know about yet.

      I’d give it a 50-50 chance for singularity this century, if development isn’t stopped for some reason.

      source
    • Belgdore@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      What does “better” mean in that context?

      source

      • driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Dankest memes

        source
    • WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      We would have to direct it in specific directions that we don’t understand. Think what a freak accident we REALLY are!

      source

      • RedBauble@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Straight out from Pantheon. Actually a part of the plot of the show

        source
    • zephorah@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I strongly encourage you to at least scratch the surface on human memory data.

      source
• Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  The human brain has a pattern recognition system. It is not just a pattern recognition system.

  source
• Cethin@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  The LLM systems are pattern recognition without any logic or awareness is the issue. It’s pure pattern recognition, so it can easily find some patterns that aren’t desired.

  source

  • Tja@programming.dev ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Said the species that finds Jesus on toast every other week.

    source
  • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Sounds like American conservatives

    source