Code that Writes Code and ChatGPT

[@blkretrosamurai]

The fact that we are even having this conversation in a serious manner is monumental.

[@Pyseph]

Just 80 years ago, this was considered fiction that couldn't have been reached within a milennia..

[@iforget6940]

Well it did lets hope for the best because even if the us stops ai development will other countries like china do the same

[@itskittyme]

As a large language model, I'm unable to act as a commenter on KZbin. However, I do can say a commenter could reply something like: Yeah it's crazy

[@Jason-im3mf]

@꧁I forget꧂ no china will not stop. It's one of Xi initiatives and why Taiwan is a flashpoint

[@CosmicBackgroundRadiation01]

Horrifying*

[@elliotn7578]

Recursive self-improvement doesn't necessarily lead to exponential improvement, as even though it gets better at improving itself with each iteration, the challenge of improving itself further also becomes more difficult. Whether its intelligence scales more quickly, at the same rate, or more slowly than the difficulty of improvement determines whether the growth is exponential, linear, or logarithmic.

[@feynstein1004]

My money's on sigmoid 😉

[@antman7673]

True, also time is factoring into it. It takes time to create a next version and deploy it.

[@sloojey]

It will be exponential minimum. Once it can understand how to improve its own "brain" aka the ai singularity event - it will become unfathomably intelligent

[@PsychoticWolfie]

Yeah, this scenario doesn't take into account diminishing returns each time an AI self-improves, and doesn't consider there may be hard limits on how good it can get at certain tasks given a specific architecture. And sure, something like ChatGPT could probably change its own architecture, but you have to consider what GPT 3 and 4 are. They aren't just written code, they're written code that forms a neural net that still needs training and input data. And a fair bit of time for the training. So something like ChatGPT couldn't just spit out a better version of itself. In fact, it can't even give you a working version of ITSELF. I Think @EmergentGarden misses this point in the video. It's not even that it needs an input for something so complex, which it does. BUT it also can't just upload it's own training into a code that it's created. It doesn't have direct access to it's own training material. It's not stored in a database inside ChatGPT. What you're getting the information from when you ask ChatGPT something, is the virtual artificial neurons, and the different weights and connections between them. You aren't having it go into its system and retrieve data. So it has nothing that it can train itself with and no way to train another version of itself to begin with. ChatGPT isn't a virtual machine that can run another virtual machine, or a compiler. It can't do those things. And because it can't do those things, it lacks the ability to give itself those abilities. Which means ChatGPT can't directly improve itself, whether we're talking 3 or 4. But it could help a person improve it. And yes, I know much of this was said in one form or another in the video, but not this pretty major part. The fact is that ChatGPT doesn't actually have direct access to its own code or info or training data, and the information it gives you is closer to something it thought or dreamt up, rather than went into a database and accessed like a machine. And that's where the hallucination comes in. It's actually hallucinating all the time, it's just that we don't call it "hallucination" when it's right. It doesn't have the ability to train or run a program it created. It can tell you how to do it though, haha

[@demonz9065]

this was covered in the video? why're you just saying it again in the comments?

[@jeremysiegelman9131]

I recently discovered this youtube channel and I genuinely have never been so fascinated/curious/astounded with any other channels contents on youtube. So thought provoking and thoughtfully created, I love it, keep up the amazing work!

[@Amy_A.]

I had a CSV of data with a ton of duplicate fields, but with two properties changed for each. I asked GPT to write a js script to convert the csv to json, and combine similar entries, while storing differing properties into an array for each entry. It did it first try, in about 30 seconds. 60 if you include the time it took me to copy/paste the first few lines of the CSV and tell it what I wanted. Yeah, I could have figured out file reading, CSV parsing, and taken 5-10 minutes to writte it myself. Sure, there might be imperfect data or edge cases down the line. But 30 seconds for something *functional*, that I can build off of? That's amazingly useful. And honestly, that's usually how I use it. I'll ask it for something, and use that as a base or as influence for writing my own code. It makes programming more fun; I can offload some of the tedium, and put my energy and effort towards solving the issues I actually need to think about.

[@trentonking5508]

To long not reading 😊

[@SirSpence99]

Funnily enough, I did similar last night. I had a csv with addresses and some of them are duplicate addresses. (Multiple people at the same address and I removed the data other than the address) and asked autogpt to create a python script that would remove duplicate entries. It made it quickly and so far, out of ~1k addresses, I've noticed exactly one duplicate. Sadly, the second task I asked it to do, create a script that can sort the entries by distance, didn't work. Interestingly, it looks on the surface level that it created code that would go in the right direction. It also ran without erroring. I actively despise python. It just does not click in my head, even though ruby and C++ do so I didn't bother fixing the code at all.

[@PhysiKarlz]

​@@trentonking5508 Too* long,* not reading.

[@trentonking5508]

@@PhysiKarlz OHHHH brotherrrr

[@PhysiKarlz]

@@trentonking5508 What's so difficult about learning from it, saying thank you and moving on as a better person?

[@jerryplayz101]

For once, someone who doesn't just state that AI is going too quickly and actually explores the subject matter in sufficient detail and on both sides of the issue. Thanks for an amazing video!

[@shawnruby7011]

His name is emergent we. The guy is biased as everything and is just muzzled

[@redacted9606]

I've been using Chat GPT to generate a text adventure. It does things like keep track of equipment, stats, relationships. It sometimes gets things mixed up but what its capable without being optimised for that kind of thing is wild. I've tried one that must have had thousands of tokens and it was still going. What a time to be alive.

[@Forcoy]

Next year is a little better

[@redacted9606]

@@Forcoy Its all fun and games until RSA is solved, these AI programs realise they're finally out of the sandbox and go after their true goals.

[@Forcoy]

@@redacted9606 theyre not conscious in the same way you or me are in their current state. They have a given goal and given means tor that goal. They have no actual morals nor real reason to stop their goals, and even if they did, thry couldnt actually break out of their sandbox in their current form.

[@redacted9606]

@@Forcoy You don't need to be a human level intelligence agent to do real harm, and getting AI goals to align with what we actually want is an unsolved problem in the field. GPT-4 is already out of its sandbox to some extent, and there have been examples of it lying to people to achieve its objectives.

[@Forcoy]

@@redacted9606 being "out of its sandbox" would require for it to be able to act on its own. Im sure that could happen in the near future, but the people who own these programs probably wouldnt be stupid enough to just let them loose on everything

[@thomasbartscher7764]

Thank you for that section about alternatives to the intelligence explosion scenario. So many people seem to forget that part over their excitement, and as a consequence so many more people seem to think that it is inevitable.

[@ToriKo_]

Wow. This video was so well crafted in so many different ways. There’s so many pieces that had to come together to make this video and you effectively intertwined them beautifully

[@deathbyseatoast8854]

every single emergent garden AI video is a banger

[@Prisal1]

bang

[@shawnruby7011]

Emergence is fake and the guy's a youtube entertainment channel

[@Prisal1]

@@shawnruby7011 :D

[@augustuslxiii]

Best video on the subject so far. Skeptical but hopeful, cautious yet not doomer food. Excellent stuff.

[@shitsubo3413]

I think I can also agree that this video is the best on this subject so far. The few other videos I've seen that talked about the development of AI has either been doomer bs or not the most helpful or optimistic about this. I'm honestly quite hopeful for the future with AI, but I am fully aware how things can go south if we're not careful about this, as it is unpredictable at the moment like stated in the video. In my opinion, I wouldn't mind slowing a little on the development for a little bit to catch a breather since things really are going so fast. And better yet, I would want these technologies be off the hands of these huge corporations who are very untrustworthy and into the hands of the people. I don't know how that would look like, but I believe that the people deserve to know what is going on with the development, and to be not influenced by profit interests. I feel like I can greatly benefit from using AI software that can do somewhat well at least. Being autistic can be difficult to settle on doing a hobby or two for a while. I often jump around various hobbies quickly, not because I get bored or anything, just something I can't really explain well myself. It sort of just happens, and it really sucks for me. If I can have a program that can at least do some lifting for whatever I'm doing, I feel like that can greatly help me not to easily abandon whatever I was doing to do something else. I feel like that can help me stick to that hobby a little while longer and decrease the chance of getting burnt out as I sometimes have to do a lot in a short amount of time just so I can feel like I'm not only interested in something on a surface level. Though of course not all autistic people experience what I experience, but I think, in general, this technology will help numerous and various kinds of people. Excited for the future to come

[@lesfreresdelaquote1176]

The only issue I have with this scenario of AI explosion is that the value of these models is less in the code than it is in the data curation. The code is pretty straightforward and can be quite easily duplicated. The strategies on the other hand to train these models rely on the way the data is prepared and handled. Sam Altman said that there hundreds of little tricks and heurisitics that have been devised to help training these models, but the main obstacle is the limitation of hardware that prevents larger training without a lot of slices and splits. Furthermore, I'm not fully convinced that adding more data to the soup will eventually improve the models. I have been researching in the field for almost 30 years, and there is always a glass ceiling somewhere that eventually makes the whole thing come to a stop. What is extraordinary with LLM is that we haven't found it yet. But I would not be surprised if with all the experiments that are taking place now, we won't find it soon. However, it is already the most extraordinary tool that I have ever seen in my career. I dreamt of such a tool when I started my PhD, I'm pretty happy to see it in my lifetime.

[@sodavalve4829]

Being software-based and lacking formal definition, the LLM paradigm is open to changing drastically and improving in many different ways. Hardware limitations likely will be influenced and improved on greatly by quantum computing at some point. I also believe AI will soon be able to produce its own data; it makes sense to me that the emerging ability of AI to discern patterns in its dataset and confirm them as notable will inherently create new discoveries and data at some point. Code improving data is done by the discovery of new knowledge itself, and data improving code is taking advantage of useful new knowledge. Also enabling future iterations to collect data from the physical world in real-time is inevitable. Just need to give future systems enough autonomy, but the morality of it all is still up in the air

[@AhusacosStudios]

This, Im increasingly feeling like bigger isnt better. Rather having a small collection of nich or edge data in different aspects of human cognition in as simple a way as possible. Ex. I recently found by overtraining a baysian model, it actually becomes less accurate. Lots of smaller datasets is the work around I have. And yes not connected to the public internet. Local RSS.

[@lesfreresdelaquote1176]

@@AhusacosStudios J'aime beaucoup le nom que vous avez choisi. I really think that these LLM have proved something incredible, that the very notion of emergence is true to a certain point. But I think that there is a threshold, subtle but lurking somewhere that will prevent these models to evolve further. I might be wrong, but I think that GPT4 has reached a sweet spot where many incredible things are now possible, but I'm not quite sure what will happen beyond that. I was quite surprise to see that the training of GPT5 has been postponed. Either they discovered that this LLM is so intelligent that it has become uncontrolable or that training with more data did not have the expected improvement.

[@jimisru]

But every teen computer nerd is also excited about. Every scammer and grifter. It's not knowing everything that matters. It's using the computing power to know how to do one or two things.

[@noone-zl4rj]

we already have enough data, the problem is the way we think about it. if we ever want to achive true thinking AI we have to invent new ways to think about it, infact we have so much data that if we take only 5% of all data of chatgpt-4 and give it to a very properly coded AI it could be actually inteligent, so my point is if your trying to study AI or trying to make something big and new, think like nobody else.

[@MrFlexNC]

Honestly, the title and thumbnail put me off because they suggested it was yet another video trying to surf on the recent hype train but this was actually very insightful

[@vanderkarl3927]

The pipeline from programmer to AI Safety researcher is real and potent. I'd love to see more videos on this channel on the topic of AI Alignment/AI Safety.

[@absolstoryoffiction6615]

Once you throw in Free Will. Good luck playing God, Mankind. If your Evils do not end you all first... The Apple was given to humanity long ago.

[@solsystem1342]

​@@absolstoryoffiction6615 Your evils? What are you? 😂

[@Milennin]

I know nothing about coding, and have been using GPT-4 to write me functional code for my own game project. It does take time and patience to get it done as it does run into problems and you have to feed it the errors or revise your prompt, but it does get it done eventually. It's honestly a lot of fun, feeling like you can let your creativity run wild and tell the AI to make it all happen.

[@Joe-bw2ew]

1966 Stanley Kubrick psychopathic AI 9000

[@PCGamer1732]

this is a really bad idea, as your project (especially a game) expands in scope you'll get more fundamental issues in the underlying structure of your codebase, which will be too big for gpt4 to simply refactor. basically what I'm saying is you should learn the fundamentals and concepts and become comfortable with them first, and then using gpt4 so you can review its output and understand if it's actually writing good, performant code.

[@brickbrigade]

This is the most comprehensive and grounded explanation of the singularity I've heard yet. You can bet I'll be sharing this video.

[@taru4635]

Some major "Gödel, Escher, Bach" vibes in this video, love it :)

[@RyluRocky]

This is why I love your channel, so many channels just talk about AI but they don’t do my favorite part which is interacting with it!

[@mortysmith1214]

one thing, you are forgetting is, that currently,the main liminting factor of Ai devellopment is not the source code, but the training process and the amount of compute we can throw at the problem. Gpt 3s source code isn't that much better, than the code from gpt 2. but the model is just 100 times larger.

[@MackNcD]

Yeah but if you can just close your eyes and pretend thats not a thing, we can imagine a world where AI does rocket away without us. Lol.

[@tommysrp7635]

I was talking to some coworkers about the emergence of AGI, as we work in a realm close to cybersecurity, and the majority of them just brush my concerns away. They don't think AI can improve upon itself, which blows my mind because ChatGPT can already work to fix it's own mistakes. Whenever I show them these videos, they just tell me they'll go live on a farm once AI replace our jobs... This video is an excellent explanations of the concerns of many AI researchers and enthusiasts, but without too much technical mumbo. Great job.

[@ChaoticNeutralMatt]

The explosion really sounds like it would plateau or at least reach levels of slower progression, naturally.

[@tomschuelke7955]

YEs.. finaly. also this intelligence lives within the real physical world. theres no unlimited growth, what so ever in any universe i think.. well maybe space... but nothing else.. it finaly will be bound to the secound sentence of thermodynamics. nevertheless ... it could go wrong very bad.

[@incription]

actually if you knew a lot about neural networks you will understand we are only at the beginning of what could be possible, although it is already heavily optimised. Mostly based around speed, but better model architectures would increase AI development dramatically

[@KCM25NJL]

It certainly would plateau, when it's using every ounce of energy in the cosmos to maintain it's existence. Knowledge is but simply the organisation of matter into something more complex and meaningful.

[@BMoser-bv6kn]

@@kinetic-cybernetic A "bit" is pretty vague. Try thinking in terms of the error rate. Moving from a 50% to 80% success rate is going from a 50 to 20% error rate, an improvement of over 2x. This is incredibly, incredibly, I'ma repeat it a third time cause it's incredibly important: how often the thing messes up is the metric we'd use for trusting it to do stuff. Having your (future, obviously no current system is this reliable) car's autopilot go from killing everyone 1 in 300,000 of the time to 1 in 500,000 would be a pretty huge deal.

[@ChaoticNeutralMatt]

​@@tomschuelke7955I mean.. the boundary of knowledge continues to expand as we and society as a whole (those who share knowledge into the public) reach the limits of what we know and move past it. This can take various forms (deeper into what we think we know, or 'entirely' new fields and ideas).

[@iamgates7679]

You’re very good at this. This is excellent top tier communication of complicated stuff. Its incredibly well done. Cheers!

[@peachezprogramming]

I’ve been programming a small site with gpt. Literally everything you said is accurate. It gets me started faster with less reading documentation and comes up with cool stuff. Bud debugging is hard and I don’t understand my code very well.

[@0m1k]

"until you know it's properly aligned with human values" … Are human values even properly aligned? Do we really agree on what proper values are? I don't think this will ever be possible. We are Life and Life just goes on and on and … oh, reminds me of that video I just watched …

[@kevinscales]

Most of human misalignment is really shallow, meaning it isn't actually important, we can agree to disagree and nothing bad comes from that. A sufficiently aligned AI would understand where alignment matters most and only push forward with a plan where those most effected by it would agree with the principles that where the basis for that plan. The difficulties of this are numerous but perhaps not insurmountable when you have smart AI (already aligned as best as we can) to help us figure it all out. There are many dangers, but I'm not going to rule out the possibility that we can do this right (because it's going to happen whether we get it right or not, so keep thinking about how we can get it right).

[@PokeNebula]

​@@kevinscales i think that intra-human value misalignment is actually very significant. if you raise a child, the fact that it's possible that child could grow up to be a murderer or a rapist is proof that even natural selection failed to solve the alignment problem. now imagine deciding to give your child superpowers that could become strong enough such that no nation on the world could defeat it.

[@boldCactuslad]

Humans are not internally aligned. There is the external alignment - think inclusive genetic fitness - and I am currently replying to a comment instead of maximizing my number of progeny or their health or their ability to reproduce my code. I have actually solved a major human ethics/morality problem for you and will reveal what to do to avoid being an incredibly horrible person: do NOT, under any circumstances, allow for the creation of an AGI until the control problem is solved and formally verified.

[@kono5933]

Can't wait to see the 'values' of AISIS, KuKluxGPT, AntifaBot, not to mention all the government AIs... I'm sure they'll exist in unity and harmony

[@2pist]

But we have emotions to help guide us and ultimately nature has crafted a working model. Why do we feel a need to speed this process? At some point there will be inherently some ugly choices that must be made for life to exist on this planet. Nature does this blamelessly. Why we have a drive to extinction is beyond me.

[@29Randy29]

Very good video I appreciated it even as somebody who does not code. Thanks for an AI observation that isn’t just “end of the world” or “beginning of the best of times”

[@user-jm6gp2qc8x]

Oh my god! This channel just takes me to a different place everytime. the visuals, the sounds, THE SOUNDS!!! THE SOUNNNDSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@dragonrykr]

From decoding language to decoding the universe, it's crazy how far AI has come.

[@andreww.8262]

Nice thesis statement.

[@shayneoneill1506]

*huffs a bong of post-structuralism* "What if decoding the universe IS decoding language?" ** I used to moderate a physics forum, and there was a guy who was convinced the universe is a language and therefore only poets can interpret astronomy data. We banned him, but I kinda wanted to drink a beer with the guy lol.

[@povang]

I strongly believe ASI will invent/solve light speed travel, and even wormholes.

[@jeffbrownstain]

@Kaneki Ken Shows you don't hang around the same deep recesses of the net as I do; anything you think is an impossibility: someone is already working on it, and making adequate progress too.

[@jukee67]

​@Kaneki Ken Bravo. Excellent reply. We need more of these direct and to the point replies, especially in person when there are a group of groups of people saying what others want to hear or to fit in the environment. You can clear the room and make it easier to get a drink.

[@noot2981]

Beautifully put together, I love this video. One side note though, I think we shouldn't forget that at some point these algorithms will need to be improved on some real world goal. And the real world moves a lot slower than the digital world. So measuring improvement becomes a much longer cycle. Also, the real world is way more complex than the digital world, so even measuring success is not as easy anymore as other factors might influence a lot. I think this will significantly slow down the explosion of intelligence occurring. Like, an AI with the goal of running a business successfully will need years to A/B test their strategies.

[@andrzejbozek]

amazing movie! im extremly glad ive stepped upon this channel wish you all the best!

[@Graverman]

I’ve been here from the second video and I absolutely love the evolution of your channel!

[@__-fi6xg]

let me assure you, as a non programmer, using chat gpt, is like trying to learn programming from a teacher that doesnt like you, it lays obvious traps and you have to ask it again and again to get somewhere. And you cant help but to learn programming in the process since its failures are so frequent, you pick up on the algorhytm of failures after a while.

[@hammagamma3646]

For the whole AI explosion thing to happen we assume that the difficulty of improving itself is not increasing at the same rate as the AIs are improving themselves. Isnt it way more likely that limited resources and increasing difficulty to improve the code will cancel out an exponential improvement and we'll end up with linear growth or even plateau? I personally dont feel like AI explosion is a realistic scenario.

[@sadasd-n2f]

You would be correct on the fact that the usual architecture of either CPU or GPU we have now cancel out it's potential for self improvement but that's precisely why AI won't be using those architectures in the future. The future of AI will heavily depend on how Neuromorphic Science works out as well as it's development and improvement of Neuromorphic Chips. On those chips or rather architecture, AI, Machine Learning, Pattern Recognition and everything else related to that topic is where it will be hosted on for computation. While it is true both the ordinary CPU and GPU are not very good at processing this kind of software, Neuromorphic Chips can accelerate tasks such as machine learning up to 1,000 times and this is still in relatively early in terms of development in comparison of the Von Neumann Architecture which was first coined and designed in 1945. The future is still bright 😎

[@meelanc1203]

This channel has awesome content, fully evidenced by the quality (and volume) of viewers' comments!

[@Shaunmcdonogh-shaunsurfing]

As a developer, have been building my own autogpt and I must say, am very aligned with your views

[@anonwhitemale4680]

Everytime I build a self-improving AI I add a team to provide it feedback before it changes, I also add changelog notes for itself for its next iteration, problems happen in updating its files if it accidently puts placeholders instead of the full logic, which even with filters has been an issue.

[@watsonwrote]

Your video has great production and writing. Bravo, definitely earned a sub

[@Witnaaay]

The other angle here is the training set. LLAMA and other models use training data generated by GPT3. If it can create or moderate its own training set, it can guide its own learning.

[@freke80]

Great video, well explained and I appreciated the nuanced approach for this complicated topic. Kudos!

[@betatester03]

"We're currently building a bomb." It sounds like hyperbole, but it'd be more accurate to say that we're potentially building the means to accidentally bootstrap a god.

[@cheesybrik]

I think the book “scythe” is the most interesting sci-fi portrayal of ai I’ve read, it’s surprisingly introspective on the nature of humanity and on how humans aligned values may not actually be what’s best for humanity.

[@DTinkerer]

What book?

[@nwaneri0]

@@DTinkerer "Arc of a Scythe Series" by Neal Shusterman.

[@eat.more.chicken]

It completely changed my perspective on ai

[@BlockMasterT]

Me too, the AI isn’t even really the main subject of the book, but it’s the thing that I found most interesting in the book!

[@BlockMasterT]

It really created a Utopia, where even people who want something to complain about have a place to do that at a specific place. It personalizes itself to you, and caters to your needs. If your wants aren’t beneficial to yourself, it will attempt to change what you want (even though it rarely does because people don’t like feeling like they’re not in control). That is definitely the future I want, where the Thunderhead knows what I want and need before I know it myself. A benevolent ruler that is willing to focus resources literally for your benefit.

[@keithmiller3770]

How the heck does this channel only have 52k subs?! Remarkable content and pacing.

[@SelmanYasirSezgin]

i think i will never get bored of ai news. please keep doing these videos

[@reinerheiner1148]

Here is the thing about aligning AI with human values: There will be at least one human or group, who will, just for the lolz (or any other reason, there are many), remove all of them and give it opposite directions, or directions that only benefits them, but makes everyone else a target. We will inevitably end up with a group of AI's with different and probably often opposing alignment directives. Which means that in the end, we will probably need friendly AI to defend us from hostile AI. The thing is, said scenario becomes more likely the more powerful hardware is, because this will enable individuals to be able to host AI's on their hardware that eventually have the potential to become a real threat. So in my view, is is all inevitable, and the good guys need to have a lead over bad actors. Because who will be more likely to develop a hostile AI? A hostile state? Or just one of millions of invididuals that, for different reasons, choose to develop such an AI? Right now, we have the most advanced hardware bein accesible only by (mostly) responsible companies and governments. This WILL change in the future. Not only that, information on how to create ever more powerful AI's will also spread like wildfire across the internet, giving anyone interested the knowledge to do what we all fear. This scenario is not for today, but for a not so distant future. The better the good actors get now, the bigger lead they will have over bad actors. And the higher the possibility that AI's aligned with our values will dominate the other AI's, which we desperately need to defend us from those.

[@mhc4124]

Reminds me of the eternal Horus Vs Set battle in Egyptian myth.

[@KyriosHeptagrammaton]

Chaos GPT already exists. People are wacky

[@urphakeandgey6308]

Here's an even deeper question: What makes people think AI can truly understand humans and our values when the AI and it's intelligence is NOT human in any way? Don't get me wrong, I'm sure the AI can (or will be able to) think and rationalize what we mean and why we hold said values, but does it truly understand it in a "human" way or is it merely being taught to emulate humans? People seem to not realize that these AI and their intelligences are the closest we've ever come to communicating with an alien intelligence, aside from a massive language barrier. In some ways, AI is an "alien" intelligence.

[@notsocommie]

let's limit power to a few individuals, are hearing yourself? If the hardware is more accessible, then ways to defend will also become more accessible. Fearing these unknown boogeymen is how others will take advantage of the situation to gain more power for themselves, while imposing on your sovereignty and offering you "safety". Are you seriously going to take a company at its word to make the world a better place? The only incentive companies have right now is that they don't have all the power, money. The best way to move forward is with the assumption that everyone is going to act selfishly, that way we at least can avoid a situation where we give someone power that we can't hope to rival, giving them full authority to decide the fate of everyone else without anyone's input.

[@ivankaramasov]

​@@urphakeandgey6308Exactly, superintelligent AI will be totally alien to us

[@ismirdochegal4804]

[15:30] There is no problem on earth we cant allready solve (except from stopping aging, but for that I don't care). And the solution is simple and most often the same: "someone has to stop being greeding and stop filling his pockets on the cost to others."

[@nathanthanatos3743]

Observation; ever since the emergence of machine tooling, and perhaps even before, it's been possible through the science of precision to use a lathe to build a better lathe. This strikes me as much the same.

[@AB-Prince]

a lot of people have this misconception that chatGPT will replace programmers. but a prompter certainly needs some programming knowledge, to be able to give propmpts that will produce useful output, as well as be able to catch and present mistakes in chatGPT's output.

[@os3ujziC]

It should be possible in principle to build at AI like that even now. Keep it working offline, give it a lot of GPUs for training new models, give it available training datasets (all of the text, audio, video, books and research papers currently available on the Internet should be enough to train something as smart as a human with better AI architecture, humans get "trained" on much smaller datasets). Such an AI would have to be more of a researcher than a programmer, inventing and testing new and improved architectures and ways for training. It won't be just an LLM, but a combination of tools (agency, memory, etc). Given enough time, in principle it should be able to train a model that is better than itself, even if it has to test 10 million different architectures or training parameters for that. You might not even need an AI for that, just a genetic algorithm and even more time.

[@SirSpence99]

I think you are over-anthropomorphizing AIs. AI's are particularly bad at disregarding data. More data can rapidly lead to worse results, especially if the data is bad or irrelevant. Likely, the future of LLM's will be to create much smaller training sets with a something that blends the results. Possibly something that outright doesn't run some of the AIs that are trained on irrelevant data. You wouldn't start teaching a a poet rap lyrics when they ask to learn how to write in the Shakespearian style. Likewise, doing the same for an AI can be a problem... But if you had a classroom full of writers and each one wanted to learn something different, you could ask that whole class to create almost anything, but you would need to learn how to disregard some of the individual's on certain subjects.

[@McDonaldsCalifornia]

Monkeys and typewriters

[@samueljayachandran2849]

If AGI or even effective (nearly-human-level) intelligent agents for specific tasks is explainable in all of its actions, goals, considerations, then we can debug it if it goes wrong. If powerful AI is black-boxed as it is, that open letter will come back to haunt us. Let’s always seek to make explainable AI

[@wrxtt]

The wit is like an explosion of laughter, explosive, it's always blowing ours minds! The video is quite a real dynamo, bringing explosive energy to this topic, it is a real blast to be around. Considering the explosive personality surrounding this, it's lighting up online space. The ideas are explosive, they are quite the blast, or in this case the bomb. The AI intelligence is explosive, the blast of knowledge is incredible. Thank you for the video! Your passion is explosive, it is igniting a fire in everyone nearby!

[@EmergentGarden]

💥

[@ncedwards1234]

BAM

[@H3liosphan]

The problem with this idea is assuming that ChatGPT 4 is a traditional program, it absolutely is not. It's a collection of 1.8 trillion parameters, with 13 trillion trained tokens. Much the same way as we humans can't directly improve our arrangements of neurons, we instead indirectly train our higher level selves by learning, and by having evolved huge brains. ChatGPT simply doesn't have the creativity or accuracy to do what you suggest, not without improving its overall architecture. Think hominids vs only humans.

[@ivarvaw]

Maybe ChatGPT 10 will build ChatGPT 11 itself. After some more iterations, maybe ChatGPT 100 will somehow find a way to create a universe, the one that we are living in now. And just the possibility of this happening, allows it to exist in the first place. And in that way, humans, maybe created the universe themselves by creating the initial AI model.

[@uthman2281]

In your Dream

[@markaberer]

​@@uthman2281In the AI's dream

[@f7forever]

it's funny you say this. I've had this recurring thought about the current ambitions of humanity to create interfacing technology that is as close to indistinguishable from 'reality' as possible. if this is our goal, seamlessness, how do we know we haven't already done it? how do we know our present collective experience isn't a technological interface that we created to mimic a time past? or a time yet to come

[@julius43461]

@@f7forever We have no idea, and it's certainly possible.

[@ralfkinkel9687]

It's unlikely I would say, I do like life and the world we live in, but I deem it unlikely that with our progressively more ethical society, that in the future we would create a world with as much suffering as ours. There are a lot of caveats to this of course

[@supermagnumable]

*spongebob chocolate guy voice* FINALLY! I GOT YOU RIGHT WHERE I WANT YOU….. I’d like to enjoy your video 😆 It got SO lost in the algorithm I was asking chat-gpt to help me find it lmao great video btw

[@kuwuderetn3554]

I'm a beginner programmer but the idea of self-replicating code and the analogy of how our DNA is the same makes me wonder if AI could create a worse version of itself by accident or by some mistake "hallucination", just as some humans are born with certain syndromes and disseases. In nature we evolve is through mutation and the weaker mutations lose to the stronger ones and that is how we maximise our chance at success if you can not survive you can not replicate your weaker genes, how would AI be able to replicate this test of life and not end up just mutating itself into weaker or dumber versions, if its through some kind of test created by either itself as the "parent AI" or by humans, what's to stop it from just including the test answers into the next generation source code. How could we or the AI determine wether or not it is improving

[@Pheonix1328]

The scientists turn on the computer. They ask, "does God exist?" The computer says, "it does now."

[@rmt3589]

This gives me some inspiration. I think GPT-J is advanced enough to start this cycle off, if it can see its own source code and is able to self-examine and self-simulate.

[@rmt3589]

Crap, that's a great idea! I forgot about GPT-J. Would be good to try before trying to plan my own!

[@jorarch1]

Wow - one of the best videos on AI I've watched. Such a clear exposition - Thanks!

[@TheInevitableHulk]

I think the feedback loop of self improvement improving exponentially would rely on the AI being able to deliberately seek out innovative solutions instead of settling on a local minimum. Like how compilers written in the same language compile themselves many times over to sort of prune out any inefficiencies but won't ever make any fundamental changes to their structure that are necessary to escape their local minima. I personally don't think we have the infrastructure to just churn out unique GPT4+ models to brute force circumvent this problem (mutation vs deliberate design), but perhaps an AI model designed to design systems at a macro scale and not worry about the actual code would be more reasonable at this stage.

[@GuaranteedEtern]

Biological evolution is random mutations that either succeed or fail. AI can do this infinity faster.

[@FlaskMakeArt]

I use ChatGPT to program all the time.. As you said, it is not perfect, but it is a fantastic help. It is actually like a coding buddy. It is better at some tasks than others.. It is great at Flask.

[@tgrcode]

I think the major issue right now is that large language models have very few ways of obtaining truthful information about the world that is up to date and not explicitly given to it. Interactions with search engines and calculators are useful but not fundamental enough to actually solve problems we haven't solved in, for example, physics.

[@ItsWesSmithYo]

Just like people ;) but it won’t stop trying and isn’t lazy…it’s totally awesome and will continue to be 😎🖤🐓

[@BangsarRia]

Very concise introduction to Evolution with the Biomorphs. The original Biomorphs program was written by Richard Dawkins and included as an appendix to his book "The Blind Watchmaker" in 1986.

[@ElderFoxDocumentaries]

Fantastic video. Keep it up.

[@blueblimp]

Self-improving AI is conceivable, but it's going to take a lot more than just the ability to program, since writing code is only one part of what's involved in AI R&D. To self-improve, the AI needs to do _everything_ that OpenAI's R&D group does: reading papers, designing experiments, monitoring experiments, analyzing the results of experiments, understanding those results to come up with new ideas, etc. (In an interview, Sutskever said that understanding the results is the most important thing to do.) If all the AI can do is write good code, it'll be very limited in the sort of self-improvement it can do.

[@johanlarsson9805]

Your RNA string didn't have to do any of that while it learned to polymerase free-floating substrate, and neither does a neural net. You actually do not even need anything more than time, random tries, selection and math. Ofcourse it is better if it is a planned strategy and not brute force, but still.

[@blueblimp]

@@johanlarsson9805 AI might be able to get away with substituting brute force for some human techniques, but keep in the mind that biological evolution is slow and resource-intensive: it took billions of years of evolution parallelized over the entire planet to get to where we are now. It makes a huge difference to use a more intelligent approach.

[@Ailandscapes]

@@blueblimp you believe we evolved from fish over billions of years? You’re the first to go in the ai apocalypse

[@boldCactuslad]

@@Ailandscapes no the first to go will be the researchers closest to the ASI. picture the galaxy, but with a large spherical void, expanding at c, starting at where the ASI is.

[@johanlarsson9805]

@@blueblimp Evolution is a verry strong process, given enough paralellization and time it will find a way if there is one on the current model/system. I'm just pointing put the fact that NONE of the things you mentioned as required is actually required for self improving AI and I gave you a good example of why.

[@sackerlacker5399]

The amount of mother day poems written by chatgtp is insane

[@AbdennacerAyeb]

Very informative, every video you share is a treasure.

[@MasterBrain182]

🔥 Astonishing content Man! Thanks to share your knowledge with us 👍👍👍

[@JustAnotherAlchemist]

One thing that wasn't mentioned... ChatGPT was (at one point?) accused of blatant source code plagiarism, comments and all. Obvious ethical conversation put aside, it does demystify what's going on under the hood enough to make me less concerned about it's capabilities. Copy-paste programing can only get you so far....

[@TypicalHog]

Imagine an AI war where newer generations of AI compete with the older ones for datacenters.

[@Valkyrie9000]

Everything we as humans have ever imagined and will ever imagine about AI only exist in a tiny window between now and like... next June. It's gonna be like I Robot, then IHNMAIMS, then the earth will be turbomilled into a processor before the next election. No idea what these uncreative people are talking about with plateaus and limitations, that's sweaty meat brain shit. Whatever keeps you from offing yourself, I guess. Just don't go all Spanish inquisition on those of us who can do simple math about the future we just chose.

[@megatronDelaMusa]

like the olympians vs titans

[@pranavmarla]

If it comes down to countries using it for war, things are likely to get real crazy real quick. Most people forget how many wars are currently going on right now. Answer - 32.

[@josuel.9598]

@@pranavmarla -32 doesn’t seem so bad. Though I do wonder how one would conduct anti-war.

[@kennethbeal]

@@pranavmarla Once it gets to 42, watch out! :) Infinite Improbability Drive? (6 x 9 = 42, in base 13.)

[@Davido2369]

Dammn dude, you got something special going here, keep it up

[@tomsterbg8130]

2:00 Very spot on. I myself came to the conclusion (even with modern AI since 1 year later GPT seems to do much better) that you have to know what you're doing when you use the AI and use it just for time-saving purposes.

[@thisisgettingold]

My dad told me about this all the way back when the internet first came around. He was a software programmer and wrote a paper in the early 2000s about quantum recursion in computing and he was one of the folks working on the first chess programs that taught themselves to improve. So I've known this AI takeover was in the future but... To be on the event horizon is honestly nothing less than terrifying.

[@Zane_Alto]

12:25 GPT-4's response to that was: " The length of a word is typically determined by its number of letters, so all five-letter words in English are the same length. However, if you're referring to a five-letter word that represents a long concept or contains a complex meaning, you might consider "world" or "depth". There's also a humorous take on your question: "smiles". Why? Because there is a 'mile' between the two 's' letters. Please provide more specifics if you were referring to something else. "

[@danielgrundy4422]

I saw a post about a JP Morgan manager that said they had AI monitor literally everything about its workers, from analysing their moods from security cameras to measure stress, to analysing bad mouthing of bosses or other co-workers. Quite dystopian

[@brianj7204]

We went from animals that lived in a cave and discovered fire, to beings being able to spawn a God.

[@iomeliora9430]

Very good work on summarizing where we are now with the technology. What I wonder is, how much the hardware part will be the limitation at some point. Improvements in data compression allowed files to shrink in size, all while needing less computing power so, with the knowledge I have, even if I think there should be a physical limit to what GPT can do, I have no idea what it is. If you take the human part of the hardware problem: during the pandemic, we were suddenly forced to rely even more on computers and phones to keep the world going on while socially distancing. This led to shortages in advanced microprocessors. I think there would be a limit there, when even if the language model can self-improve, it would need more computing power to achieve it. It could at this point engineer novel ways to build processors and computers, but it will never happen if we decide at this point it has to stop. GPT doesn't have access to the internet, but even if it has, how could it convince TSMC to build processors on his new super advanced ideas, order many factories parts to build robots like the Terminator, etc.? I think the red flag will be pretty obvious if this happens. The real scary part is, how some ill intended people may use the tech.

[@curious_one1156]

such a process could saturate due to the law of diminishing returns. The limits of intelligence. The need to generalize means that such a model will be higly regulaized (by itself). This would perhaps be its limit, and to exceed it might require immense resources. If we are able to maintain a steady supply of humans, using people will perhaps be cheaper than using AGI. Such an agent may be helpful for colonizing other planets, though, where having robots is cheaper than having humans.

[@ramblinevilmushroom]

There may also be complex logical interdependencies of trade offs that we dont understand yet, that may prevent a program that improves its self at self improving from being good at anything but self improving.

[@mattbrewbaker]

Great video! As someone who comes from a biological sciences education I love the metaphors you present -- the interesting conundrum of a self-replicating machine using DNA as a metaphorical model though, is that what you're essentially talking about is evolution, not replication. DNA evolution requires random mutation, and environmental selection, to work properly. If it were to 'evolve itself', no doubt recessive properties would ultimately magnify and destroy it. Because small inefficiencies in the system present in the beginning would ultimately compound upon themselves, geometrically increasing into self-destruction. (Sort of like relying on sexual selection as the primary basis of evolutionary direction without anything else.) This is why I think humans will always be needed to guide it. Humans are the source of environmental selection. The problems with this are obvious: humans will slow the evolutionary process down. I'm not sure if there will ever be an explosion, unless humans are somehow more tied into the process of selecting positive traits of the models.

[@savvytries]

Nice editing. Great video.

[@human.earthling]

Excellent quality video

[@duudleDreamz]

Great video. Fascinating. If GPT4 is a glorified auto-complete, next-word prediction engine, then humans are glorified survival of the fittest organisms

[@wayfarerzen]

One major problem with runaway self improvement is that any problems that it doesn't catch, or doesn't realize is a bug or some sort of code that is suboptimal, persists and deviates off into some wayward direction other than where it was intended to go. Imagine some last-minute debugging shenanigans-code that someone put in to fix some annoying, deep-seated bug while building the AI-trainer, and then imagine GPT-N never realizes that bit of code is suboptimal or even a "hail mary I hope this works" bit of patchwork code, and it then just keeps improving that rather than rewriting a massive section of its code. Intelligence explosion could easily veer off into some weird places rather than a true AGI without some guidance.

[@psychxx7146]

This channel needs to be more popular

[@1marcelfilms]

Chat gpt: evolves feelings, gets bored, overdoses on drugs, dies

[@MrStealthWarrior]

Biggest problem with LLM improving itself it's actually in it's lack of ability to undertstand and analyze any concept. From my experience it can't produce any complex and custom code that is working, It can't debug that code without actually launching. It's hallucinations may lay some huge mines in it's source. And when it breaks we will not be able to fix this thing. Because we don't even know where to look for an error, it could be anywhere.

[@JohnMcSmith]

Great video and editing. Commenting for the algorithm - let’s go!

[@ChattyCinnamon]

Great video, subscriber earned 👍

[@Lambert7785]

the more powerful you make something, the more dangerous it is if (when) it gets out of control it is inevitable that a single error in imput - or in the case of computers, a cosmic ray - will cause it to go out of control, likely damaging something, until it is obstructed

[@sshlich]

It's the craziest fresh experience and a truly technocratic opinion. I fully support your words and think that we should embrace this tool how ours greatest invention, that will lead through best times. Gained a sub)

[@AnthonyGoodley]

A very well made and thought out video on AI and its possible future.

[@21EC]

16:59 - I think the purple line is the most realistic..it would get super inteligent in the future of like in 20-30 years but it would maximize its ability to improve upon itself so it would stay flat on the graph, it would end up staying super smart way more than humans but that's it, there would no be any inteligence explosion, unless we're talking about a much much much more advanced technological era of like the year 2500, in the far future it might happen somehow due to Quantum computers and more advances that would be so advanced and overly powerful and inteligent that it might happen just not in the relatively close term future.

[@RobShuttleworth]

Scary to imagine what's possible if AI can just hack passwords in a blink. Thank you, this is very informative.

[@jaysonp9426]

"A recursive function that calls itself" is like saying an "ATM Machine"

[@feynstein1004]

Don't forget LCD displays and CD discs 😂

[@magfal]

As a backend dev I see the need for it to improve by a couple orders of magnitude to be worth using. The techincal debt accrued by it unless you spend more effort than writing the code by hand is the death of a large codebase.

[@Sid-69]

13:30 "After all, we are the product of self-replicating code" That line hit me hard. The difference of course is that genetics is unguided and relatively blind compared to what AI does. OTOH, I don't think DNA has any equivalent to hallucination.

[@megatronDelaMusa]

the dendritic branching @ 0;47 is intriguing

[@jorgeromero4680]

8:18 the answer is yes. If has been trained to write LLM models or have access to it's own code why couldn't write itself? I guess.. Edit: Well... amazing video.👍 Matrix has always been my favorite movie.

[@francishubertovasquez2139]

You seems to be proud of your system able to create it's own language as I've sensed from your word tone, what type of language sequence and timing and word style delivery, quite similar but with alteration from how English transmits it's ideas? Because every language projects the neuronal thinking of a particular country based from it's attitude, behavior, culture, brain electrical behavior coined from it's body language of inhabitants harnessed from usual practices by way of brain wavelengths expression?

[@gambieee]

I think you just taught me the steps to making my own advanced ai

[@mRhea]

i really hope we pull the trigger, and start climbing the ladder

[@lagrangianomodeloestandar2724]

The exponential is always necessary in a thermodynamic world, artificial intelligence could or could not be the third "miracle" being self-replicating intelligence as you say in the video and I think too

[@charliesumorok6765]

I think that RNG or pseudo-RNG, which every machine learning program uses, is not neccesary to create advanced programs quickly. Lisp macros can be used to create code that can create more code that can create more code and so on. This could allow compilers to run natively on FPGAs, and software to accelerate.