Die Forscher testeten große Argumentationsmodelle für verschiedene Rätsel. Als die Rätsel schwieriger wurden, scheiterten die AIS mehr, bis sie an einem bestimmten Punkt alle vollständig versagten.
Auch ohne die Fähigkeit, die aktuelle KI zu begründen, wird die aktuelle KI immer noch revolutionär sein. Es kann uns dazu bringen, sich selbst zu vertreiben und Ärzte und viele andere Fachkräfte in ihrer Arbeit zu übertreffen. Es sollte humanoide Roboter zu viel physischer Arbeit machen.
Diese Forschung legt jedoch nahe, dass der aktuelle Ansatz für KI nicht zu AGI führen wird, egal wie viel Training und Skalierung Sie versuchen. Das ist ein Problem für die Menschen, die bei diesem Ansatz Hunderte von Milliarden Dollar werfen, in der Hoffnung, dass es sich mit einem neuen Einhorn von AGI Tech auszahlt, um mit Google oder Meta in Einnahmen zu konkurrieren.
New research from Apple suggests current approaches to AI development are unlikely to lead to AGI.
byu/lughnasadh inFuturology
9 Kommentare
I think it depends on the definition of AGI. I would argue thatLLMs are already generally intelligent across all fields.
I don’t think anyone researching AGI thought LLMs were the path. That’s just blowhard Silicon Valley investment speech
> Even without the ability to reason, current AI will still be revolutionary. It can get us to Level 4 self-driving, and outperform doctors, and many other professionals in their work. It should make humanoid robots capable of much physical work.
This is an important point. Yes, current AI are dead ends, but even if they stop improving tomorrow, what we have right now is already helping a lot.
> Still, this research suggests the current approach to AI will not lead to AGI, no matter how much training and scaling you try. That’s a problem for the people throwing hundreds of billions of dollars at this approach, hoping it will pay off with a new AGI Tech Unicorn to rival Google or Meta in revenues.
And this is according to Apple themselves, not some random tech bro…
r/ singularity in shambles once again lmao. (The same sub that mass banned me and a lot of other people for daring to have dissenting / realistic opinions).
Research from apple who is currently behind when it comes to ai? Well kinda classic approach from them.
Is there a conflict of interest here?
Of course Apple, who are lamentably losing the AI race despite crazy investments are now pumping studies telling people it’s not the way to go
That’s not at all what this suggests. It’s like that articles went to media misinterpretation like 10 times. There is zero actual fundamental limitation of LLMs to my knowledge.
Here’s the thing numbskull developers don’t get.
We won’t be the ones to give it AGI. We cannot create something greater than us.
It will do it itself and some point, and we may not even be able to detect it.
Big part is that these models are built and designed by a very small subsection of an already small subsection of people. The frame of scope is narrow while the resource consumption is massive.
You mean life and intelligence is more than just a giant linear algebra equation!? Surprised pikachu face!