• webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    My standard for agi is that its able to do a low-level human work from home job.

    If it needs me to pre-chew and check every single step then it can still be a smart tool but its definitely not intelligent.

    • frog 🐸@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      If it needs me to pre-chew and check every single step then it can still be a smart tool but its definitely not intelligent.

      If this is the standard for AGI, I’m not 100% convinced that every human meets the standard for intelligence either. Anyone who’s ever done team projects will have experience of someone who cannot complete a simple task without extensive pre-chewing and checking in on every step.

      It’s going to end up like that thing with the bear-proof bins, isn’t it? The overlap between the smartest LLMs and dumbest humans is going to be bigger than one might think, even if the LLM never achieves true general intelligence or self-awareness. Bears aren’t sapient either, but it doesn’t stop them being more intelligent than some tourists.

      • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thats why i said low level, and it does not need to be perfect either. Not all my colleques are on the bright side but all of them are remaining employed without someone else sitting next to them for every single minute. Also a huge thing for human intelligence is in personal strengths. They may Be bad for task A but when it comes to taking in an emphatic way or analyzing sports there suddenly Pro. This ability is what defines “General” intelligence versus narrow Intelligence which is supposed to do one job only.

        I work with gpt4 for my Job and while It is very useful the moment you poke it with deeper questions it becomes clear it absolutely no idea what its doing or what is going on. You cannot trust anything it says and often its a frustrating experience rollong the regenerate button till it gets valid answer.

      • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        In such context intelligent is much more relative. Same thing with animals. There is also big difference with ai not having a proper body yet.

        There are a number of low level jobs that can be done by both children and animals for instance a service dog. They are both capable intelligent creatures.

        In the past children started to work in a factory the moment they could stand on their legs.

        It would be near impossible for a 2yo or a dog to do a work from home assignment but for AI this should by far be an advantageous situation because its trained on computer data and does not need to spend so much of its “brain” learning to move and go potty.

          • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            It is relevant because “intelligence” is a collection of multiple things. The first kinds of intelligence a living creature learns are all fysical. If you instinctively pull your hand away when it touched fire. Thats already a kind of intelligence. Learning to understand and act on bodily needs to survive is bigger example.

            The first steps towards emotional intelligence starts with the physical comfort of the womb and hugs received as a baby.

            Every sentient creature we have ever known starts as autonomous body. A child without a body does not exists.

      • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        How are small children different from smart animals?

        It takes humans a while to develop our thinking goo, before that, we’re barely able to survive.