oh thanks lol

Primary myoblasts double on average every 4 days! So if given infinite nutrients, and you started with 1 gram of meat, it would take .... 369 days to equal the mass of earth!

Doesn't the futurism/hopium idea of building an ideal city go back to Disney? Who does more or less have feudal stronghold rights over florida?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPCOT_(concept)

Because of these two modes of transportation, residents of EPCOT would not need cars. If a resident owned a car, it would be used "only for weekend pleasure trips."[citation needed] The streets for cars would be kept separate from the main pedestrian areas. The main roads for both cars and supply trucks would travel underneath the city core, eliminating the risk of pedestrian accidents. This was also based on the concept that Walt Disney devised for Disneyland. He did not want his guests to see behind-the-scenes activity, such as supply trucks delivering goods to the city. Like the Magic Kingdom in Walt Disney World, all supplies are discreetly delivered via tunnels.

Or The Line in Saudi Arabia.

Definely Sneer-worthy, though it's sometimes worked. Napoleon redesigned Paris, which is probably a good thing. But they are stuck with that design to this day, which is probably bad.

answered above.

I wanted to know what you know and I don't. If rationalists are all scammers and not genuinely trying to be, per the name 'lesswrong' in their view of reality, what's your model of reality. What do you know? So far unfortunately I haven't seen anything. Sneer club's "reality model" seems to be "whatever the mainstream average person knows + 1 physicist", and it exists to make fun of the mistakes of rationalists and I assume ignores any successes if there are any.

Which is fine, I guess? Mainstream knowledge is probably usually correct. It's just that I already know it, there's nothing to be learned here.

Real talk: a real doll with the brain of a calculator would be a substantial product improvement.

Sure, but they were 4 function calculators a few months ago. The rate of progress seems insane.

My experience in research indicates to me that figuring shit out is hard and time consuming, and “intelligence” whatever that is has a lot less to do with it than having enough resources and luck. I’m not sure why some super smart digital mind would be able to do science much faster than humans.

That's right. Eliezer's LSD vision of the future where a smart enough AI just figures it all out with no new data is false.

However, you could...build a fuckton of robots. Have those robots do experiments for you. You decide on the experiments, probably using a procedural formula. For example you might try a million variations of wing design, or a million molecules that bind to a target protein, and so on. Humans already do this actually in those domains, this is just extending it.

I keep seeing this idea that all GPT needs to be true AI is more permanence and (this is wild to me) a robotic body with which to interact with the world. if that’s it, why not try it out? you’ve got a selection of vector databases that’d work for permanence, and a big variety of cheap robotics kits that speak g-code, which is such a simple language I’m very certain GPT can handle it. what happens when you try this experiment?

??? I don't believe GPT-n is ready for direct robotics control at a human level because it was never trained on it, and you need to use a modification on transformers for the architecture, see https://www.deepmind.com/blog/rt-2-new-model-translates-vision-and-language-into-action . And a bunch of people have tried your experiment with some results https://github.com/GT-RIPL/Awesome-LLM-Robotics .

In addition to tinker with LLMs you need to be GPU-rich, or have the funding of about 250-500m. My employer does but I'm a cog in the machine. https://www.semianalysis.com/p/google-gemini-eats-the-world-gemini

What I think is the underlying technology that made GPT-4 possible can be made to drive robots to human level at some tasks, though if you note I think it may take to 2040 to be good, and that technology mostly just includes the idea of using lots of data, neural networks, and a mountain of GPUs.

Oh and RSI. That's the wildcard. This is where you automate AI research, including developing models that can drive a robot, using current AI as a seed. If that works, well. And yes there are papers where it does work. .

I'm trying to find the twitter post where someone deepfakes eliezer's voice into saying full speed ahead on AI development, we need embodied catgirls pronto.

academic AI researchers have passed him by.

Just to be pedantic, it wasn't academic AI researchers. The current era of AI began here : https://www.npr.org/2012/06/26/155792609/a-massive-google-network-learns-to-identify

Academic AI researchers have never had the compute hardware to contribute to AI research since 2012, except some who worked at corporate giants (mostly deepmind) and went back into academia.

They are getting more hardware now, but the hardware required to be relevant and to develop a capability that commercial models don't already have keeps increasing. Table stakes are now something like 10,000 H100s, or about 250-500 million in hardware.

https://www.semianalysis.com/p/google-gemini-eats-the-world-gemini

I am not sure MIRI tried any meaningful computational experiments. They came up with unrunnable algorithms that theoretically might work but would need nearly infinite compute.

Hi David. Reason I dropped by was the whole concept of knowing the distant future with too much certainty seemed like a deep flaw, and I have noticed lesswrong itself is full of nothing but 'cultist' AI doomers. Everyone kinda parrots a narrow range of conclusions, mainly on the imminent AGI killing everyone, and this, ironically, doesn't seem very rational...

I actually work on the architecture for current production AI systems and whenever I mention approaches that do work fine and suggest we could control more powerful AI this way, I get downvoted. So I was trying to differentiate between:

A. This is a club of smart people, even smarter than lesswrongers who can't see the flaws!

B. This is a club of well, the reason I called it boomers was I felt that the current news and AI papers make each of the questions I asked a reasonable and conservative outcome. For example posters here are saying for (1), "no it won't do 25% of the jobs". That was not the question, it was 25% of the tasks. Since for example Copilot already writes about 25% of my code, and GPT-4 helps me with emails to my boss, from my perspective this is reasonable. The rest of the questions build on (1).