5 comments

  • stevebmark 7 minutes ago
    After using frontier models it’s hard to understand why anyone would think this is the path to AGI. Self improving models will likely have limited ability and returns. There may be breakthroughs that enable more general self improvement but the current state of frontier models isn’t that.
  • Buttons840 25 minutes ago
    People seem to expect a sudden shift with "self-improvement", but don't AIs already improve themselves via training? What is there to improve?
    • gchamonlive 4 minutes ago
      [delayed]
    • zer00eyz 14 minutes ago
      > AIs already improve themselves via training

      Marginally. Model collapse is still a problem. Continuous learning is still a problem.

      For AI to make a big leap we need a big break through.

  • carabiner 20 minutes ago
    Does anyone know the status of John Carmack's AGI work?
    • cheschire 4 minutes ago
      I’ve had this question on my mind at least once a month for what feels like years at this point.

      I don’t feel like monitoring Twitter to see how it’s going though.

  • deadbabe 45 minutes ago
    Recursive self-improvement will ultimately be a problem of money. It's a very big bill and AI companies need to start thinking in terms of how they will accumulate cheap and free energy, because merely paying for compute will no longer be enough. Money is the bottleneck. The future requires companies that are post-money.
    • epistasis 25 minutes ago
      The alternative is to switch to far more efficient models and have aggressive optimization of efficiency as part of the process of improvement.

      There are at least two resources here that have a Pareto optimal front: time and energy. And effort spent to change the shape of that may pay off more than efforts spent purely on improving intelligence and agency.

    • jaggederest 34 minutes ago
      Money can be exchanged for goods and services. I think the real constraint is actually physics, nominally energy, which is what a big chunk of the operational cost comes down to. I'm already basically assuming the next 20 years of fab time is set aside to feed the beast, so the capital cost is "give me all the processing and memory you have"
      • resonious 29 minutes ago
        Data centers is a service that itself consumes many goods.

        Until an AI can operate in the real world in a completely sustainable way, humans have the reins.

        • jaggederest 5 minutes ago
          I feel like I may have communicated poorly. I mean that, ultimately, any recursively self improving intelligence would be limited by the power cord, and as such, the idea that it would permanently escape human control seems somewhat silly.
        • colordrops 24 minutes ago
          An AI could manage supply chains and management structures to keep the data center running. It's not like a CEO is out there running wire. The AI could just do what an executive would.

          If humans decided this wasn't acceptable and tried to shut it down, the AI could epstein their way into controlling those who hold the reigns, either through bribes or blackmail.

          Doesn't require boots on the ground, just a connection to the internet and an imperative to do whatever it takes.

    • timr 32 minutes ago
      Obviously the doomers will tell you that the future looks like the Matrix, because most of what they predict is based on extrapolation from sci fi movies.
      • throwaway219450 2 minutes ago
        If you were a superintelligence why would you farm humans and waste resources on all the excess... material... that isn't required for thought? And unless the machine's goal is to specifically abuse human consciousness, why wouldn't they bio-engineer their own grey matter?
      • mrworld 23 minutes ago
        The datacenters would consume a lot less energy if all the compute was handled in human brains… And there wouldn’t be any more heating if we just removed the sunlight… Truly a “Claude, please solve global warming” moment. The matrix was ahead of its time.
  • batperson 47 minutes ago
    [dead]