abss

As we approach 2025, it feels like humanoid robots are closer than ever to becoming a part of our daily lives. But do we need AGI for this revolution to truly begin, or is the next step simply about refining and perfecting existing technologies like perception systems?

What do you think is missing to make humanoid robots a reality in our homes and workplaces?

I've recently delved into Erik J. Larson's book "The Myth of Artificial Intelligence," and it has reshaped my understanding of the current state and future prospects of AI, particularly concerning Large Language Models (LLMs) and the pursuit of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI).

Larson argues convincingly that current AI (i included LLMs because are still induction and statistics based), despite their impressive capabilities, represent a kind of technological dead end in our quest for AGI. The notion of achieving a true AGI, a system with human-like understanding and reasoning capabilities, seems more elusive than ever. The current trajectory of AI development, heavily reliant on data and computational power, doesn't necessarily lead us towards AGI. Instead, we might be merely crafting sophisticated tools, akin to cognitive prosthetics, that augment but do not replicate human intelligence.

The book emphasizes the need for radically new ideas and directions if we are to make any significant progress toward AGI. The concept of a technological singularity, where AI surpasses human intelligence, appears more like a distant mirage rather than an approaching reality.

Erik J. Larson's book compellingly highlights the deficiencies of deduction and induction as methods of inference in artificial intelligence. It also underscores the lack of a solid theoretical foundation for abduction, suggesting that current AI, including large language models, faces significant limitations in replicating complex human reasoning.

I'm curious to hear your thoughts on this. Do you think our current approach to AI, especially with LLMs, is fundamentally limited? Is the idea of AGI as we conceive it now just a myth?

How are you experiencing the effects of 'professionalization' in terms of contributions and moderation in the current internet landscape? My recent experiences on Reddit and Wikipedia suggest that it's increasingly difficult for new users to effectively contribute without significant karma accumulation or forming relationships with existing moderators. This seems to be a detrimental trend, as it reflects not necessarily the quality of content, but rather a system of social 'gatekeeping'. Do you think the implementation of AI moderators on these platforms would be beneficial in reducing human biases and improving the quality of discussions, by reformulating ideas and correcting deviations from the rules?

How are you experiencing the effects of 'professionalization' in terms of contributions and moderation in the current internet landscape? My recent experiences on Reddit and Wikipedia suggest that it's increasingly difficult for new users to effectively contribute without significant karma accumulation or forming relationships with existing moderators. This seems to be a detrimental trend, as it reflects not necessarily the quality of content, but rather a system of social 'gatekeeping'. Do you think the implementation of AI moderators on these platforms would be beneficial in reducing human biases and improving the quality of discussions, by reformulating ideas and correcting deviations from the rules?