Hacker News Reader

Comment by atleastoptimal | Hacker News Reader

Do you honestly think no AI advancement will fix those limitations? That LLM's or their successors will just never reach human level no matter how much compute or data are thrown at them?

View on HN

No, we won't. Not in either of our lifetimes. There are problems with infinitely smaller problem spaces that we cannot solve because of the sheer difficulty of the problem. LLMs are the equivalent of a brute force attempt at cracking language models. Language is an infinitesimal fraction of the whole body of work devoted to AI.

That's what they used to say about Go before DeepMind took Lee Se-dol for a ride.

Not bad for a parrot.

As for language, LLMs showed that we didn't really understand what language was. Don't sell language short as a concept. It does more than we think.

Ok. Check back on this thread in 3 years then.

You should really make a bet on longbets.org if you're serious.

Done, see you in three years.

comment time limit is 14 days, not sure if you can keep it alive for 3 years by commenting 160 deep

They could create a new post, resurfacing this bet.

how will the other person ever find it

They could … share email addresses.

>> Do you honestly think no AI advancement will fix those limitations? That LLM's or their successors will just never reach human level no matter how much compute or data are thrown at them?

It has not happened yet.

If it does, how trustworthy would it be? What would it be used for?

HAL-9000 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_9000) is science fiction, but the lesson / warning is still true.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com