From Essays to Coding, This New A.I. Can Write Anything

P

poster153712646

Robin


The organization was founded in San Francisco in late 2015 by Elon Musk, Sam Altman, and others, who collectively pledged US$1 billion. Musk resigned from the board in February 2018 but remained a donor. In 2019, OpenAI LP received a US$1 billion investment from Microsoft.
Click to expand...

Funded by the elite that wants us to be obsolete after we have been killed or sterilized by the COVID vaccine.
 
Johnnyvee

Johnnyvee

Ostrich
Other Christian
poster153712646 said:




Funded by the elite that wants us to be obsolete after we have been killed or sterilized by the COVID vaccine.
Click to expand...


Seems like there is more to human intelligence than binary computing alone. There might be a quantum mechanics type mechanism that is associated with the neuronal microtubules. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microtubule

It`s a fascinating hypothesis at least, and could explain why machine intelligence and biological/human intelligence manifest so differently. Meaning that computers are extremely stupid in a very smart way so to speak. They are incredible at very narrowly defined tasks like mathematics, but equally dumb compared to say humans in other areas, and there is no indication that regular computation can solve this. Of course, if the theory is correct, then quantum computing could perceivably create machines that really could think and surpass humans. But that is totally in the blue and the moment, and may never come to fruition. I think were pretty safe for the time being at least.

 
M

MovingForward2050

Pelican
IBM Plans to Have a 1,000-Qubit Quantum Computer by 2023, and a Million Qubit Device by 2030

This should definitely help with A.I. development.....

"While it’s not officially in the roadmap, the company has intimated that it’s targeting a million-qubit device by 2030—the same timeline Google is working to. And it’s already building some of the supporting infrastructure. The release of the roadmap also saw the unveiling of a 10-foot-tall, 6-foot-wide cryogenic fridge codenamed “Goldeneye” that would house such a device.

Getting there won’t be easy, though. It will require breakthroughs in everything from materials science to cryogenics and software to run these devices. Gil tells Tech Crunch that’s exactly why they’ve released their roadmap, to give other players in the quantum computing industry the confidence to specialize in specific areas rather than everyone trying to do everything.

But it’s still far from clear whether IBM will really be the pace setter in this race. While Google has been fairly quiet this year, it still has today’s largest quantum processor and hotly disputed bragging rights as the first company to achieve quantum supremacy—carrying out a computation that would be impossibly difficult for a normal computer."

singularityhub.com

IBM Plans to Have a 1,000-Qubit Quantum Computer by 2023

IBM’s largest quantum processors today are 65 qubits—a shade behind their biggest competitor, Google, which has a 72-qubit device.
singularityhub.com singularityhub.com
 
nathan

nathan

Robin
Catholic
Johnnyvee said:
Seems like there is more to human intelligence than binary computing alone. There might be a quantum mechanics type mechanism that is associated with the neuronal microtubules. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microtubule

It`s a fascinating hypothesis at least, and could explain why machine intelligence and biological/human intelligence manifest so differently. Meaning that computers are extremely stupid in a very smart way so to speak. They are incredible at very narrowly defined tasks like mathematics, but equally dumb compared to say humans in other areas, and there is no indication that regular computation can solve this. Of course, if the theory is correct, then quantum computing could perceivably create machines that really could think and surpass humans. But that is totally in the blue and the moment, and may never come to fruition. I think were pretty safe for the time being at least.

Click to expand...


I worked on AI for about a year and half. One of the conclusions I came to is that the current neural network-based standard of AI is not much of a threat to achieve true AI because it is not how the human mind works (and they are trying to somewhat recreate the human mind in a computer).

Also, I concluded that one of the main reasons for this just happens to be that a lot of these scientists and mathematicians leading the AI charge believe in human evolution and are thus focused not on higher-order logical algorithms but instead on lower-level animalistic intelligence algorithms based on raw pavlovian learning, which simply is not the full story.

In other words, they think they can achieve true human-like intelligence solely through algorithms that mimic reward/punishment systems and continually refine themselves, much like teaching a mouse how to complete a maze by either shocking him or giving him cheese. This does work for solving hyper-focused problems, but there is no semantic meaning behind any of it. In this way, it does seem like this is how humans behave in matters involving instinct or subconscious training (what I refered to as animalistic intelligence algorithms because these are primarily how animals operate), but they are thinking these algorithms also apply to conscious thought.

Another clue that neural networks are not accurate representations of the human mind is that for most NNs, you need a lot of cases/examples (often thousands) of whatever it is you are teaching it in order for it to "learn" the pattern. Humans often can sense patterns after just a few cases/examples.

Another clue is that the actual pattern or rule that the NN spits out is never clean or comprehensible and never applies with perfect accuracy. What I mean by this is that if you give a human 100 measurements involving force, mass, and acceleration, a human could come to the conclusion that F=MA, whereas if you give a NN those same measurements, it would only ever come up with, at best, a formula like F = (1.003456M)*(1.000955A). I'm heavily simplifying this for the purposes of this example, but NN's don't ever induce clean algorithms the likes of which that are found in nature.

So given all of this, I have to conclude that NNs at best can only mimic lower-tier mental processes and do not explain what is going on with regards to our intellectual gift from God that separates us from animals.
 
R

Romeo James

Chicken
it's very interesting! I have heard a lot about the capabilities of Artificial Intelligence and I understand that in fact what Artificial Intelligence is doing now is just imitation and repetition of human capabilities. Not more. Essay writing is great, but it's just a random bunch of phrases or words that don't come out of nowhere. I recently turned to professional personal statement writing services for help in correctly writing a personal statement and I realized that no matter how cool artificial intelligence is, until the human brain it will not replace.
 
Last edited:
Top