No

Wtf lmao horny ahh robot

I think it’s still reasonable to say agi is decades away , I think the right comparison for someone saying chatgpt is agi, would be someone saying agi is still centuries away

This guy 😹

😂😂

If we are talking about like “make me a game that includes a leveling up system, set in a world with dragons and wizards…” then I think we’re still a while away, but it really depends on your definition of a game. It might be able to code a very basic app that could be put on the AppStore as soon as next year, but this would most likely require quite a bit of human help.

Yeah 40-50 years sounds right, if ai growth wasn’t exponential.

I doubt the people who were using art to pay their bills are the ones being replaced by ai

Have you tried the psychologists bot on character.ai?

If things like ai tech and robotics tech reach a high enough level the economy would be turned on its back, it would go through a huge shift where people simply don’t have to work

My question would be what is the next step of this research?

It’s actually the complete opposite💀 generally poorer places reproduce more while richer more prosperous places reproduce less

I just have 0 Idea where you’re getting your info from. 10-20 years ago you would be looked at like a crazy person if you talked about being immortal or curing aging. Even the people who talked about it still though it was 40-50 years away, which is pretty consistent

Yea and can you clarify your claim, is it that the singularity is the invention of a superhuman intelligence, that a superhuman intelligence is necessary, or what?

Edit: because in the original comment I responded to the poster said “To surpass human-level intelligence you need human-level intelligence. No getting around the definitions of the singularity” Implying the definition of the singularity is surpassing human level intelligence. Which (if we assume this paper is the be-all end-all) isn’t supported by this paper.

Do you have anything else to say?

I dont agree he is the primary promoter in fact I’ve never heard of him before now.

Also what is the “change” he is referring to? The change is the singularity and he just thinks advanced intelligence is how we will achieve it . It’s not necessary, you can have a technological singularity without higher intelligence and you can have higher intelligence without the singularity

You’re just wrong my guy, you find the 1 source on the entirety of google that agrees with you and try to act like it’s the final arbiter of truth on the matter. We usually pair the singularity with an increase in intelligence because that’s the most realistic route to the singularity, however it is not the singularity. My description is more similiar to how Neumann described it, how kurzweil describes it, how pretty much anyone describes it. It’s called the technological singularity, not the intelligence singularity

Edit: even then after reading the first few paragraphs it seems like the author agrees with me more

“ I argue in this paper that we are on the edge of change comparable to the rise of human life on Earth. The precise cause of this change is the imminent creation by technology of entities with greater than human intelligence.”

That’s not true, it’s likely that is what it will take to reach a singularity but it is not the singularity itself, we could increase human intelligence by 100x but if the rate of technological progress doesn’t change, then we are not in a singularity. A singularity is like a technological revolution, just on steroids

Using those to amplify human intelligence?

Not true, those are examples of quick technological progress (bar the neolothic revolution) but not quite on the level of the singularity

Not quite

I’ll clarify then, by singularity I’m talking about the point in which technological progress becomes uncontrollable and incalculable which results in massive changes to human society

I think for average people who aren’t super tech savvy, most don’t know there is chips in these things

Ah yes of course