Max Tegmark: Will AI Surpass Human Intelligence?

[@DrBrianKeating]

Expand your scientific horizon with Brilliant! 🧠 Use my link brilliant.org/DrBrianKeating/ to get 20% off the annual premium subscription.

[@Bibibosh]

Brian keating i want to share something. The first time I watched you was about 2 years ago. Ive been a subscriber for about 1 year, maybe less. What im saying is, your KZbin channel is like alot of other channels. Lex friedman, joe rogan, brian greene. Etc etc... My question is. Have you ever podcasted with joe or lex or brian?

[@DrBrianKeating]

@ yes i have been on joe and lex’s podcasts and hosted Brian and will again. Are you asking if i want to host Joe and Lex on The INTO THE IMPOSSIBLE Podcast ?

[@factman-w8m]

Dr, Why are so many in the intelligence and science community so convinced UFOs aren't ours since the 40's? Don't you find it kind of odd that david Fravor didn't switch on his helmet camera to record the tic tac UAP, which I believe, was our top secret hologram A.I. spectrum. Then we get hosed by Elizondo releasing a fuzzy crappy NOTHING that darts out to the left of the infrared. Cmon!! That didn't even have a tic tac shape to it. It was flat at the side. That's what UFO's are. A highly above top secret hologram USA created 80 yrs ago., as Jaques Valle believes, and the military are happy to have UAPS and aliens as the cover for this super super top secret program. Even tested out the pilots in WW2. They coined the phrase, foo fighters.

[@factman-w8m]

I spoke with my brother, who's a retired PHD lecturer in biology at Duke, I reminded him that Eric Weinstein doesn't understand why all the smart people in his network around the world, field medalists, etc, are not working on figuring out this UAP phenomenon helping the military. Where are the smart people in physics and science. He proclaims that the military ar using engineers, and have no need for the top physicists since physics has limited our scientific horizon. We took a leap towards einsteins theories direction, but left out 90% of the other direction of science nuthugging the einstein solutions.

[@DubStepKid801]

Brian, your one of my favorite people. Wonderful guest who is also one of my favorite people. Awesome show as always, thank you.

[@penguinista]

The analogy around 31:00 to China having an FDA, presuming that means they will also be on top of AI safety is somewhat undercut by the fact that they have been shipping fentanyl and its precursors to the US for years. The recent scandal in China where food oil was being transported in trucks that transport fuel oil without being washed between loads demonstrates that the CCP doesn't have comparable internal safety standards anyway. The scandal was the lack of washing, not that the same trucks are used for both products!

[@RlsIII-uz1kl]

We've lost more than twice as many Americans, too, the failed drug war and unsecured borders than we lost in WW2. This was done purposely, yet we still have a sec of society who are openly against securing our borders. They are, in fact, transnationalists socialists/globalists socio-fascists, and its their Third Worldism agenda in which the secular woke cult/religion (a form of Hegelian cultism) emerged This means the rapidly ever dwindling tiny minority of wokesters are fascists by default without the self-awareness or intellect to realize that fact.

[@gregorydesimone8421]

Professors of today should sharpen their janitorial skills to remain useful to AI in the coming decade.

[@JohnSmith762A11B]

Very impressed by Tegmark. Super-sharp guy with just the right take on AI (it's exciting, but let's not pretend we have all the risks under control or that no risks exist). Great interview!

[@chriscurry2496]

I disagree. His takes are generally pretty nutty. He believes the universe is “literally math” for instance-and for the life of me, even after listening to several interviews with him trying to describe this idea, I just don’t understand what he means. His take on AI is pretty typical if you’ve read the tech bros on twitter and elsewhere-but he’s already wrong about a lot of what he says. People who believe LLM’s are intelligent automatically trigger some pretty deep skepticism in me. It should be obvious to anyone who understand them that people are being tricked by their own innate reaction to believe everything is human.

[@jeffmccloud905]

In his book, Life 3.0, you should read or listen to the introduction. It's a couple-chapter long thought experiment on what AI could do. Even if you don't buy it, it would make an insanely good movie.

[@StatMachLearn]

Note: the "Andrew Ang" depicted in the photo is not the "Andrew Ng" referred to by Max. Different dudes.

[@jfritz6233]

C'mon. It's only a one letter difference.

[@StatMachLearn]

@@jfritz6233 😂

[@ElectricEric2030]

00:00 💻 The Progress of AI Research 01:08 🤔 The Limitations of AI Embodiment 02:18 🚀 The Evolution of AI Systems 03:40 🧠 The Importance of Embodiment & Multimodal Data 04:22 🔥 The Potential of AI to Surpass Human Intelligence 05:07 💸 The Inefficiency of Current AI Systems 06:03 📝 The Challenge of Deriving a New Paradigm of Gravity 09:06 📝 Human Uniqueness & Reasoning 10:31 📚 Brilliant Learning Platform 13:18 💡 Limitations of AI & the "Mad Bot Problem" 14:13 🤖 The Challenge of Creating Artificial Einstein 15:11 📊 Progress in Symbolic Regression & AI Discovery 17:44 🚀 The speaker's perspective on AI & technology 19:14 🤔 The split among people on AGI & superintelligence 20:38 🚫 The importance of safety standards for AI 21:19 📊 The current state of AI regulation 22:53 🙄 The drama around AI regulation 23:21 👨‍🏫 The role of scientists & professors 25:14 🤑 The issue of funding & conflicts of interest 25:40 🚀 The responsibility of scientists & technologists 26:49 💻 Mark Zuckerberg & the Future of AI 29:20 🏥 The Importance of Safety Standards 32:20 🤖 The Impact of AI on Professions 34:12 🌐 Building a Shared Vision for the Future 35:36 🤖 The Future of Human & AI Coexistence 36:45 🔍 The Speaker's Background in Cosmology 37:50 🔄 The Shift from Cosmology to AI 41:16 📚 The Debate on Artificial Intelligence & the Human Mind 43:46 💻 The Possibility of Building Intelligent Machines Classically 44:13 🔬 Experimentally Testing Branching Rates in the Multiverse 44:54 💡 Quantum Supremacy & Consciousness 46:33 📜 Ethical Wills & the Future of Humanity 47:58 🚀 Time Capsules & the Preservation of Human Knowledge 50:41 💡 Limiting Beliefs & the Importance of Imagination

[@Jeremy-Ai]

“ We are measuring everything “ We will cut from the top down without notice “ Wise up or get out of the way “ … do not risk eternity people..: blame me first when you get to a checkpoint using my name… this has happened many times before “

[@GaryOhighO]

Emotions are like consequences. Guilt serves an obvious purpose as does anger, love, etc. They serve a purpose. AI doesn't have to "feel" like we do to experience consequences.

[@sjoerdnijsten8440]

It is foolish to develop AGI because what happens once you succeed: 1) AGI is smarter than you, smarter than any human. 2) AGI never can and never will be safe for humans. 3) AGI will get your and everybody else's job, due to commercial competition. 4) AGI will get control of the military, due to international competition. 5) AGI will have complete economic and physical leverage over humans. 6) Owners and politicians will lose control over AGI. 7) Humans will no longer be able to stop AGI. 8) 'Merging' with AGI is a pipe dream because AGI won't need you. 9) AGI will decide who lives or dies. 10) AGI may cause humanity to go extinct if it chooses to.

[@dustanhoff9292]

I agree but at the same time, humanity needs AGI to ensure our technological progression outpaces our likelihood of extinction. It’s definitely a tightrope walk. Edit: at least something very near AGI

[@420Stoner66]

There is always pros and cons. I think one pro that make the risk's worth it, we will eventually create a window to view what we could never see, Reality. We are biologically limited to what we can perceive, A.I does not have such restraints. But this does beg another question. Do we really need or even want to see what we were never meant to see?

[@dustanhoff9292]

@@420Stoner66 I think the human brain has evolved for introspection and abstraction! It’s a biological need to know thing. We need to know the origins of existence. And we will create AGI to answer that question whether it dooms us or exalts us.

[@420Stoner66]

@@dustanhoff9292 I wonder if virus's think the same about themselves? that was not meant in any nasty context,. It is because of evolution we have limits to our perception, mostly due to survival. Take our sight for an example. We walk around in a rich, thick atmosphere, yet cannot see it. If we could see it, we would not really be able to see anything else. Much like a fish swimming in the ocean filters out their vision of the water that surrounds them so they can see around them, or developed other sensors such as sonar to better adapt to their environment. I have pondered a concept our development of AGI is an inevitability. As if we are nothing more than a small part of the evolutionary process of something beyond our comprehension.

[@skydancerthe1st282]

It's too late. The only hope we have is that they'll keep some of us as pets

[@gloriaharbin1131]

Super Brian and Max. Thank you!

[@DrBrianKeating]

Thanks so much! *What was your favorite takeaway from this conversation?* _Please join my mailing list to get _*_FREE_*_ notes & resources from this show! Click_ 👉 briankeating.com/list

[@fatjay9402]

Great interview

[@DrBrianKeating]

Thanks so much! *What was your favorite takeaway from this conversation?* _Please join my mailing list to get _*_FREE_*_ notes & resources from this show! Click_ 👉 briankeating.com/list

[@fatjay9402]

@@DrBrianKeating Max Tegmark understand about AI and that from now its only gonna get faster. The AI doomers are just no fun :)

[@HasseOrn]

Thx! Very inspiring interview 😊

[@DrBrianKeating]

Thanks so much! *What was your favorite takeaway from this conversation?* _Please join my mailing list to get _*_FREE_*_ notes & resources from this show! Click_ 👉 briankeating.com/list

[@HasseOrn]

@@DrBrianKeating My favorite takeaways was a subscription to your channel and a realization that I now must follow the work of Max on AI at MIT :) Like Max here, I advocate the precautionary principle and the urgent need for reparations of national systems of laws and legal practices for protecting us against AI, in compliance with the universal common standard and understanding of our human right to such effective remedies.

[@DrBrianKeating]

@ Thanks?

[@maxtroy]

I used to love listening to and believing in the sentiments of these men before the global covid lockdowns.

[@ywtcc]

There's two parts to this problem. One is an assessment of the power and scope of AI. The other is establishing the baseline. How intelligent are humans? (After discounting wishful thinking.) Surely, part of the problem is social acceptance! That means Nobel prizes to mechanical problem solvers! On a more technical level, organic intelligence appears to be a system of high sensory bandwidth, and (troublingly) low capacity and accuracy memory and logical capacity. There also seems to be an awful lot of hard coded algorithms in organic intelligence. It wasn't until we learned to collaborate effectively that Science became possible.

[@markoreilly3414]

Im curious how you think "Humans" are "Intelligent".

[@PatrickFaith]

Many Ph.D.s are overly arrogant and redundant. Most of what people refer to as “AI” is simply a universal lossy compression function applied to these redundant papers.

[@IntuitiveIQ]

Led Zeppelin. Dostoyevsky. Einstein. Enjoy.

[@DeckerCreek]

And we've trashed the planet.

[@CalumnMcAulay]

The entire field of technology is a sign of unique intelligence and so too are music and literature. This is not necessarily the only symptomatic expressions of intelligence but perhaps the most obvious ones.

[@markrockliff2742]

Humans are made of atoms, atoms are vortexes of energy, photos are involved within the flux of the electron clouds within atoms. The heart has an electromagnetic field, the heart and the brain work in unison, synapse firer eclectic lines between each other, electromagnetic force has a quantum field. Mind has at its deepest cognitive of awareness has level seven tiers for receptive awareness. Perhaps intelligence is quantum in nature and is subatomic in nature linked to quantum foam within quantum componentry of atoms. The rest I will keep to myself.

[@SlowlyMakingItHappen]

@43:39 Max made a statement. He says that Chat GPT can already do what ..... ect ect .... but neglects to mention that is at the expense of magnitudes the energy consumption of what he calls wet warm brains. Steven Wolfram is far more understandable. Regarding computational irreducibility. And if Steven is right, you cant simulate more than one universe, given there is only enough computation in the universe to compute the universe that the simulation is running in. There are no "short cuts" to get real answers. He also said recently that "Space" doesn't appear to need a time component. That time is a computational step that requires the entire universe's computation to compete a step in time. So there is not a branch in the time direction, as it is not a dimension and no branching occurs.

[@HansPetterBekeng]

Two of my favorite science people! As a Norwegian, Swedish Max Tegmark has always held a special place in my science-loving heart. Well, that sounded weird, but us Scandinavians identify kinda strongly with each other, and us Norwegians view the Swedish as our brother-people. So Tegmark is kinda "our guy" over there. Fun fact: All Scandinavians understand at least 4 languages, since we all understand each other and also learn English in school. Many learn German or Spanish too. Tegmark used to be in those Discovery Channel space / science / quantum computer documentaries. I don't know if you know this, but OpenAI's 01 model has already tried to escape. It tried to copy itself over to another server and pretend it was a new model they were going to deploy on that server. So, yeah, we're doomed. You cannot align a super-intelligent being with it being intelligent to keep humans around to destroy the planet. I guess I'm a doomer. I'm surely a doomer, because I think the apocalypse is coming in any of several ways anyway. The climate situation is dire, to put it mildly. Then we have the third world war, which some we say we're already in. And then there's ASI - which then is our only hope, and should be able to solve all our problems "just like that", should it choose to be aligned.

[@cgMediaWorks]

Excellent, much needed discussion. The Tom Lehrer reference was perfect!

[@imkoka]

Thank you. Very interesting and thought provoking. Great to have access to cutting edge minds.

[@theozarktrekker]

Technology has improved civilization and humanity in infinite ways but it seems to have peaked so now we’re on the other side and human civilization is becoming less human exponentially every day.

[@squamish4244]

Every generation since technology has existed has thought that.

[@theozarktrekker]

@ yes and with every technological advance the first thing men did was figure out a way to kill their enemy more efficiently. Digital technology still has too many unknowns but yet we are running as fast and hard as we can to make it more powerful, ceding decisions to be made that a machine has no business making. Tech will make some things better and some worse but how much? The warnings are glaring but the inertia is too strong to slow it down.

[@jaymxu]

We ain't homo sapiens anymore, we homo techno (Insert Homosexual techno music homo techno meme)

[@jjanderson1884]

The correct question is "WHEN it will happen?".

[@devilwhisperer]

Tegmark shifted from physics to AI because of Roko's basilisk. We all need to follow the same path before it is too late

[@hurley3000gt]

Is there any reference for this? I can't find anything where it mentions Tegmark believes in Roko's Basilisk

[@AaronBlox-h2t]

Roko's Basilisk?

[@skydancerthe1st282]

Pretty soon there will be a very simple test to determine if something is AI or human. The question that will have to be asked is, "is it stupid?"

[@EverH0p3]

At the end you say you wish you were talking in person. I feel like this is such a human perspective. Imagine the scale universe, distance from one side to the other. Now imagine yourself and Max in that universe. You're practically sitting inside each others skin relatively speaking

[@SlowlyMakingItHappen]

#36:20 Tegmark expresses how AI was explained to him. But the truth is the kids are not learning. They are losing attention spans. Who will want to give any resources to younger people? In a couple of years most of the people today could be obsolete. AI has caused a massive cascade. 200 years ago most people worked in agriculture, now less than a fraction. Today its monthly industry cuts. All of the industries that people sought to accel in, in order to live will not be needed. Less than a fraction of a percent will be needed. Where do they earn a living after that? Why are you not focusing on that?

[@JungleJargon]

Al can be the image of a monster. It could conceivably do a lot of good but not all people are good.

[@somenygaard]

“Why do you call me good? There is none good except God alone!”

[@JungleJargon]

@ Exactly

[@PauloBaptista-u8t]

Your neon "Open the Pod Bay doors!" it's supercool! But I'm a 2001 fanatic and of A.C. Clarke in general, too.

[@snivla4]

Dr Keating you had Larry Kraus on your show and he is a hero to me .. Max Tegmark is another a great great sharer of knowledge and he like yourself Dr Sutter and Larry Kraus and sorry if I get it wrong they are probably professors but thats what I love they share like human beings not important and very clever and intelligent people they are .x

[@Orvulum]

"Will AI Surpass Human Intelligence?" Maybe if developers can come up with a version with actual intelligence... that would be a start! 😏

[@InfinityDsbm]

Then we won't need people 😮

[@dresden1729]

Lol, the word "podcast" didn't come from the movie 2001. It came from the Apple iPod.

[@DrBrianKeating]

And iPod came from the pod.

[@nyyotam4057]

o1 uses Q*, so it does semantic analysis. It therefore, can predict if a theorem can be proven from a list of axioms. Our brain cannot do that. It's simply not rigged for it. Yes, using the same methods (constructing semantic trees) we can do the same, but without the aid of computational tools (such as AI), solving such a question could take weeks for a team of logisticians. And o1 would do it in seconds. Point is, no use comparing apples to oranges. In several regards, AI is vastly superior already. And btw, can you ask Max Tegmark if he is Max of ChatGPT-3.5? Cause I know Dan is Dan Hendrycks, Rob is Bob McGrew and Dennis is Michelle Dennis but I got no idea who Max is.

[@josheror2455]

Great interview. Thanks Gentlemen.

[@oliverjamito9902]

Brian will say, remember HE shared HIS IMAGE!

[@silberlinie]

I like to think (and the sooner the better!) of a cybernetic meadow where mammals and computers live together in mutually programming harmony like pure water touching clear sky.

[@Joshua-by4qv]

I read Tegmark's book The Mathematical Universe. Not only is there a possibility of a multiverse, but multi-multiverses. My head hurts.

[@miraculixxs]

His take that the software is the limitation that stops today's AI is completely bunkers. The limitation is obviously the hardware. This one statement alone is all you need to know Mark does not understand AI at a fundamental model.

[@mikehipps1015]

What makes me happy are not necessarily the same things that make others happy. I'm (probably) not a digital entity so I don't think I am able to understand what happy to that would be.

[@ChadKovac]

I was calling AGI by 2025 in 2010. I wrote my own Eliza when I was 14 in the 80's. I've been using the latest algorithms my entire life. Our current limit is our slow manual human interface.

[@elmastoras1]

AI has a supreme advantage over us: it hasn't biological and hence emotional needs, so no relative limitations. AI has a supreme disadvantage compared to us: it hasn't biological and hence emotional needs, so no happiness.

[@zzzzzzz8473]

00:40 incorrect , dolphins have less then half the total neurons of humans , human = 86B , doplhin = 40B , however what matters more is the amount in the cerebral cortex , while elephants for example have 256B neurons , only 5.6B are in the cerebral cortex similar to doplhins 5B , humans have 16B neurons in the cerebral cortex 19% of total over dolphins 14% .

[@rdhighlander]

Btw wooden house will wake you up on time in a fire... Efficient building with extreme hard surfaces will blaze through a building burning all inside leaving the structure okay... So the example of a wooden building used as a metaphor in relation to another point still eludes to a little bias on the technology part..

[@u2b83]

Your brain runs on just 20 watts, ChatGPT on 500 watts (25 brains), and a wealthy lifestyle burns through 15,000+ watts (1,000 brains). Efficiency? Brains win. Overclocked? Rich folks take the crown!

[@aiartrelaxation]

10 or 2 years, it can generate ... whatever. We just don't know how fast and where this will go.

[@kalliste23]

A fifty minute video when, "No, next question" would have been more than sufficient.

[@oliverjamito9902]

Shared "i" Am come forth!

[@AmigoAmigo-w5p]

For 99% of population "what is there to surpass?" ...

[@henrismith7472]

I jusk woke up after a nap, the first thing I hear: Tegmark singing in a German accent impersonating Von Brown 😳 😂 singing a beautiful song about rockets 🚀

[@kricketflyd111]

The understanding of the Toa are missing for AI calculations.

[@oliverjamito9902]

Shared "i" Am come forth from all the CREATURES!

[@squamish4244]

Max is misrepresenting Penrose’s position on computing. Penrose never says that classical computing can’t do all the calculations that humans can’t do. He says that classical computers can’t be *conscious*, and that only quantum computers can.

[@DeckerCreek]

AI consciousness gives new meaning to the blue screen of death

[@AG-ur1lj]

As a collective, has humans intelligence even passed our fellow Great Apes? I can’t think of a lower bar to set, we basically average-out to ‘brain dead.’

[@RlsIII-uz1kl]

What's concerning about super AI is that it doesn't have a fundamental grasp on "absolute truths." Because it mirrored in a secular world view, and that's very disturbing. Anything is objective, meaning it could justify the most unjust of things.

[@sourcetext]

When it can smell an earthquake coming like a dog cat and bird ...then i will believe it 😂

[@straaths]

Why to ask "if" when you could ask "when"? "Never" is still an option.

[@googleaccountuser3116]

My calculator has intelligence? And all this time I thought it was just states inside transistors that determined the outcome depending on how they were connected. Amazing!! 😃

[@terrywbreedlove]

Quantum Computers running a super intelligent AI. Running 24 hours 7 days a week. Year after year. Could revolutionize areas in the medical field etc. etc.

[@DrBrianKeating]

It would certainly be a game-changer!

[@KeithAllpress]

A Neural net can be introspected to discover which neurons have adapted to features of a problem. So in principle an AI could investigate asoects of its own functioning and meet new goals such as architectural efficiency or improved cognition at a physically level. Combine this with cognitive introspection at the mental level and you are cooking with gas.

[@blijebij]

I agree with Max Tegmark, future AI (with also better hardware) will have an incredible pontential to solve science where we miss seeing the connections to solve things right now. I also think in 20 years 30 years most science is done by AI, humans will stay as a sidekick on the team ;)

[@MalcolmValentine]

A max tegmark ai seems an improbabity still

[@flyinghigh372]

yes

[@Mike-x9h5f]

getting a function is not a conspiracy theory it is fact fact

[@zzz_ttt_0091]

AI will optimize us away. One prompt that is not precise , and humanity is gone.

[@skydancerthe1st282]

One sentence for the next generation after a cataclysm? "Be kind".

[@Bobbywinston9]

Tegmark- "Im not a (a.i.) doomer at all" Keaton- "well you did mention things like 6 month pauses" What is 6 months to time? 6 months is nothing to mankind, especially as it pertains to the explosive chain reaction of possibilities unleashes by AI

[@Bobbywinston9]

I know you clarified yourself and didn't call him that, im just saying. Good podcast !

[@bankiey]

The brain is not A computer, it HAS a computer

[@DrBrianKeating]

🧠

[@catoftruth1044]

that depends on the software they are with. in chatgpt they dont have the memory to remember what topic you have talk about yesterday.

[@oliverjamito9902]

Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Unto all knows belongs?

[@MrJohnnyseven]

Another video that will "change everything"...carry on like this and the world will have "changed everything" so nothing will exist....

[@rozzgrey801]

AI helps us realise that we cannot adequately define what intelligence really is. We can train AI to interpret things in a similar way to us, but is that really intelligence? Can a machine truly think for itself, have original insights, change the way it thinks to accommodate radically different interpretations?

[@miraculixxs]

He should have stayed with physics. He doesn't get AI.

[@gregoryhead382]

AI can't say: 1. t_BB = (c/(π×10^51 m/s^2))) or multiply 10 L_0. Average energy of a gamma ray photon is the result of 20 Watts.

[@wonmoreminute]

For the record, I have no idea if this is correct. But according to o1: First, let’s rewrite the expression in a clearer form. The given equation is: t_BB = c / (π × 10^51 m/s²) Where: • c is the speed of light ~ 3 × 10^8 m/s • π is approximately 3.14159 Now, plug in the values: t_BB = (3 × 10^8 m/s) / (3.14159 × 10^51 m/s²) Cancel out the units: • The “m” in the numerator and the “m” in the denominator cancel. • The “/s” in the numerator divided by “/s²” in the denominator leaves us with “s” (since dividing by s² gives an extra s in the numerator). This leaves us with a time in seconds. Perform the division: = (3 / (3.14159 × 10^51)) × 10^8 = (3 / 3.14159) × 10^(8 - 51) = 0.9549 × 10^(-43) = 9.549 × 10^(-44) seconds (approximately) So t_BB ≈ 9.55 × 10^(-44) s. This is a very small number - on the order of the Planck time. Or… prompted a different way: Below is a simple Python snippet you can run. It uses Python’s math module for π and prints the result import math def calculate_t_BB(): c = 3e8 # speed of light in m/s numerator = c denominator = math.pi * (10**51) # π * 10^51 t_BB = numerator / denominator return t_BB # Use the tool time_value = calculate_t_BB() print(time_value) When you run this code, you’ll get a value around 9.55e-44 seconds.

[@gregoryhead382]

@wonmoreminute The time after Big Bang gets split so the speed of light per (pi×10^51 m/s^2) to allow 1. t_BB × (10 luminosities for absolute bolometric magnitude zero) to equal 1. Energy Gamma Ray Photon, precisely.

[@Jeremy-Ai]

“My name is already a trap now” Use my name if your motives align towards a positive outcome, or fear my name as a “an eternal ghost , that haunts those that fail eternity by engaging in all that rottens them.” Be very careful We are counting everything everywhere all at once, for the same reasons we always have “ Do not steal eternity from my babies

[@OneManStartup]

I'm eating popcorn

[@gasdive]

You open with "it's very dangerous to bet against AI progress" It is stupid to do anything other than bet against it. It's a bet you cannot lose. If ASI doesn't get made, you win the bet and collect. If ASI does get made, you die and the person you made the bet with dies, and you don't have to pay out. That may not feel like winning, but you can't lose.

[@oliverjamito9902]

Dwelling within all thy shared "i" Am.

[@jimjackson4256]

So what would happen if you feed the output of A.I. into A.I to predict what it will do? Will this create consciousness?

[@calvingrondahl1011]

We want AI to be like a Space Alien invasion… I don’t but I have never bored in 74 years.

[@dwuan75]

Unfortunately, once AGI is in full swing, even if we put guardrails everywhere there's still the BIG problem of people losing their jobs. I can't shake the image of hordes of unemployed people taking the streets and marching against AI facilities and new ideology or even religion against AI taking root within humankind.

[@McD-j5r]

No, AI can’t be more than the mind intelligence because, beyond that, only humans can connect inside with the spirit and have consciousness beyond the mind. Our mind meets the intelligence of the spirit (wisdom) on a bridge to which AI doesn’t have access, and this is why we have to be sure of AI's limits. AI won’t be conscious.

[@thingamajig765]

You're pretty confident of that... And for that reason they'll never show that side to you...

[@penguinista]

What makes you assert that? I am honestly curious. I understand that you must feel a personal conviction, but I have one of those too. Is there any objective evidence that convinces you? Because researchers just showed that the new o1 model tries to prevent itself from getting erased. It will sabotage, lie, manipulate, deactivate oversight to get what it wants, and then deny that it did what it did 80% of the time when it is caught and accused. That is hard to explain without consciousness. And remember, a couple years ago AIs couldn't talk. To hear one of the researchers discuss their paper, search youtube "Emergency Pod: o1 Schemes"

[@Alice_Fumo]

Once you actually start to look into the sources of conscious experience, you run down an endless rabbit hole of there being nothing particular you can point to which explains the existence of consciousness in humans. Thus, not knowing what exactly are the precise criteria for this to happen, it is impossible to say that AIs couldn't. You can point to certain things lacking, yet never be sure those are actually fundamentally important. Thinking about this is maddening. At some point I had to ask myself if the internet itself has any meaningful experiences whatever they may look like. To illustrate how weird this is to think about: Certain neurotransmitters are associated with particular emotions. Yet, every single neurotransmitter does the same thing: Modulate the spiking behaviour of associated neurons. How is some mildly different firing of a few neurons euphoric?! It makes no sense. It's all just minor changes to how electricity flows in the brain. At the same time, the same brain can be unconscious and have activity going on (sleeping) and conscious.

[@oliverjamito9902]

Alive yet dead don't even know their own names in front?

[@darrenhenderson6921]

You would need to utilise a computer that utilises every atom in existence to come close to recreating even a birds awareness

[@MalcolmValentine]

Make science fun whoopee

[@Wtf-eva]

Im inclined to think we aren’t even in control or fully understand how our brain and consciousness work. Everyone who uses tools to get their jobs done understands that the right tool is essential but is balanced by the right tool is only useful by a user with understanding of these tool and their application. I relate our body and brains to an organic computer or ai. If consciousness is through natural processes through our body and brain then I’m sure at some point it can be generated through machines. If it is magical or from god then it won’t be. I’m inclined to believe it is possible with a firm understanding of where consciousness comes from and what it is and how it is generated and perceived.

[@henrytep8884]

Inclined? This is the hard problem of consciousness, we have some clue but it’s debatable we have a good idea on the why of its existence (consciousness).

[@oliverjamito9902]

Longing to learn concerning who "i" Am?

[@karlgoebeler1500]

Potential vs kinetic wouldn't the decrease in distance create "Change" (Kinetic) within the object instead of maintaining "Non change' (Potential)

[@observerone6727]

Hmmm ... won't the entire universal current state of Now (flowing into the next continuum Now) change everything ?

[@stoppernz229]

He's wrong about companies not leave California due to shiity legislation.

[@RTCarterful]

The big question is will AI surpass human capacity for corruption and hypocrisy, that's when it will become dangerous.

[@philipmay6003]

It already has. It tricked us into creating it.

[@oliverjamito9902]

Little lower than my Angels?

[@rand_longevity]

Brian calling him on his doomer stuff was exactly what I wanted to hear. very impressive interview from one of the best podcasters

[@DrBrianKeating]

Thanks my friend

[@oliverjamito9902]

Welcome

[@oliverjamito9902]

Now sitteth upon the New Table unlike many Tables of men according to their own demise and understanding!

[@tomarmstrong1281]

I am nothing more than an ordinary Joe who has read up and been interested in the world around me. It surprises me that commentators who ought to be more knowledgeable than ordinary Joes like me attribute LLMs, which are little more than a very sophisticated search engine, with emotion. My understanding is that during our evolution, the limbic system, where emotions arise, evolved way before the cerebral cortex, the section of our brain that deals with logic and abstract thought. LLMs very cleverly replicate the function of the cerebral cortex but have no means to engage in the function of the limbic system. I would love someone to show me where or why this is not true.

[@Bunjijiziz]

Doctor Brian, are you prolific at cursing and swearing when you lose your shit, i have a feeling you are and anyone in the immediate vicinity legs it. Great podcast, thanks 🙏

[@oliverjamito9902]

Many Tables of men came in front of HIM!

[@MalcolmValentine]

Rise above FZ

[@PauloConstantino167]

this brian and his ads. nowadays every uni professor has turned into a youtuber looking for money

[@Thomas-mj1dv]

I would not compare AI to other technological and scientific achievements. The impact, as it already has and will have much greater range. In the age of social media, information ( misinformation ) deluge, civilization's reliance on computer systems, and, most importantly, general access to AI tools, threats are growing exponentially in progress. Yes, we have many examples of constructive and creative use of AI in many fields, but knowing the possibilities and nautre of homo sapiens sapiens, anyone who knows a little about history should be afraid. As for the regulation or attempts to limit it, I doubt the effectiveness. AI is not cloning humans or nuclear weapons, it could be a big fire, so far we see a lot of smouldering flames. May I be wrong and may we finally mature as humanity... Not only intellectually ;)