Re:John Carmack: I’m going to work on artificial general int...
by joe_the_user on Thursday November 14, 2019 @12:12AM
(#21532962)
"Wow, there are a lot of people in this thread arguing whether or not John Carmack has the right skills to help AGI, or about the specifics of his knowledge.
Do you all realize you're arguing about nothing?"
Absolutely. I should mention why. AGI is an open field. AGI is opennest of open fields. Advances in deep learning tell quite little about what AGI will look like. We don't know if AGI will be a hundred incremental innovations from deep learning, ten deep advances from deep learning or five incredible advances with only a slight relation to deep learning. We don't know if it will just appear when 100 super-computers are hooked together or if a genius at home on their laptop could cobble it together. Sure, you could extrapolate and say compute has mattered more than theory, so far. But you could also say impressive things have been done but they haven't approached robust generality and there's something we're missing. Pick the approach but then you'll have to see if it's possible.
Do you all realize you're arguing about nothing?"
Absolutely. I should mention why. AGI is an open field. AGI is opennest of open fields. Advances in deep learning tell quite little about what AGI will look like. We don't know if AGI will be a hundred incremental innovations from deep learning, ten deep advances from deep learning or five incredible advances with only a slight relation to deep learning. We don't know if it will just appear when 100 super-computers are hooked together or if a genius at home on their laptop could cobble it together. Sure, you could extrapolate and say compute has mattered more than theory, so far. But you could also say impressive things have been done but they haven't approached robust generality and there's something we're missing. Pick the approach but then you'll have to see if it's possible.
Etc.