I was just asked about the nature of AI awareness today - regarding me asking an AI to give me it's definition for 'Discernment Lattice' - which it did so, and then I was asked by an HNer if I just accepted that because the AI was able to spit out a definition, if I thought it was a thing?
And after listening to Aaronson, and the Penrose comments, as well as listening to this LiquidAI talk -- It doesn't matter from a philosophical perspective:
I take some clay and shape it into a bowl of a specific shape to hold a specific thing - thats exactly the same as me defining my Own Terms (as the HNer put it) - because it is a scaffold to specifically hold the shape of the communication I want to have with the AI.
So I am using my DiscernmentLattice concept to construct my interaction constraints to maximize the efficacy and accuracy and utility of the Entanglements I want to make.
---
The talk was good at 2x. (prolly 1.8 is best)
He needs to talk with Sarah Walker about the Assembly Theory and Chemistry-Based Intelligence v Silicon-Based Intelligence.
Notes:
Is there a limit to AI - training data, but will feeding all of TikTok
#Bottlenecks:
* Content
* Training data
* Data
* Compute
* Power
We didnt have a theory to predict we would be exactly here. We dont have a theory of really where AI is going.
We use deflationary language to say that at a reductionist level an AI is just computationally dealing with bits, but at a higher level we attempt to prove that its not understanding.
But we keep finding AI able to reason in ways that are Human like.
So what is the non-arbitrary difference between Humans and AI, Roger Penrose saying that the brain is sensitive to some unquantifiable aspect of reality.
Digital computers can be copied, wiped re-rane, but Humans have an ephemerality about our decisions that make them unique because we only get once. Whereas an AI can run many, rinse repeat.
---
Was specifically hired to work on AI safety. Deepmind stated that it certainly looks like weaponized AI is on the table - lets make sure we do it, then Musk said Google shouldnt control AI - --> OpenAI --> Anthropic all vying to be the Alignment leader -- but its really an Arms race in it.
"Even the good guys arent doing a good enough AI safety"
Talks about how @sama leaving OpenAI fiasco as a big deal, because that level of chaos doesnt just happen because someone has bad vibes.
How Safety:
* Black box problem - Visibility
* Training AIs to lie... problematic
* Evaluate an AIs capabilities before releasing them
* AI Gain-of-function reseach is happeneing at all the companies to "build a chemical, biological weapon, hack this, generate security flaws in code" - trying to get them to do the worst possible things in a controlled setting to determine if BadThings are emergent capability
* Deepfake watermarking/text water marking efforts are proposed.
He is a computer scientist and artificial intelligence researcher currently working with Liquid AI. He has previously done research at Harvard, MIT, Intel, and the AI Foundation.
I was just asked about the nature of AI awareness today - regarding me asking an AI to give me it's definition for 'Discernment Lattice' - which it did so, and then I was asked by an HNer if I just accepted that because the AI was able to spit out a definition, if I thought it was a thing?
And after listening to Aaronson, and the Penrose comments, as well as listening to this LiquidAI talk -- It doesn't matter from a philosophical perspective:
I take some clay and shape it into a bowl of a specific shape to hold a specific thing - thats exactly the same as me defining my Own Terms (as the HNer put it) - because it is a scaffold to specifically hold the shape of the communication I want to have with the AI.
So I am using my DiscernmentLattice concept to construct my interaction constraints to maximize the efficacy and accuracy and utility of the Entanglements I want to make.
---
The talk was good at 2x. (prolly 1.8 is best)
He needs to talk with Sarah Walker about the Assembly Theory and Chemistry-Based Intelligence v Silicon-Based Intelligence.
Notes: Is there a limit to AI - training data, but will feeding all of TikTok
#Bottlenecks:
* Content * Training data * Data * Compute * Power
We didnt have a theory to predict we would be exactly here. We dont have a theory of really where AI is going.
We use deflationary language to say that at a reductionist level an AI is just computationally dealing with bits, but at a higher level we attempt to prove that its not understanding.
But we keep finding AI able to reason in ways that are Human like.
So what is the non-arbitrary difference between Humans and AI, Roger Penrose saying that the brain is sensitive to some unquantifiable aspect of reality.
Digital computers can be copied, wiped re-rane, but Humans have an ephemerality about our decisions that make them unique because we only get once. Whereas an AI can run many, rinse repeat.
---
Was specifically hired to work on AI safety. Deepmind stated that it certainly looks like weaponized AI is on the table - lets make sure we do it, then Musk said Google shouldnt control AI - --> OpenAI --> Anthropic all vying to be the Alignment leader -- but its really an Arms race in it.
"Even the good guys arent doing a good enough AI safety"
Talks about how @sama leaving OpenAI fiasco as a big deal, because that level of chaos doesnt just happen because someone has bad vibes.
How Safety:
* Black box problem - Visibility * Training AIs to lie... problematic * Evaluate an AIs capabilities before releasing them * AI Gain-of-function reseach is happeneing at all the companies to "build a chemical, biological weapon, hack this, generate security flaws in code" - trying to get them to do the worst possible things in a controlled setting to determine if BadThings are emergent capability * Deepfake watermarking/text water marking efforts are proposed.
---
I recommend the vid that follows it as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcNlv9gp20o LiquidAI Bach...
26:20 Does Roger Penrose’s Theory of Consciousness Make Sense?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcNlv9gp20o&t=1580s
This interview perfectly couples to Aaronson's
This interview with Joscha Bach is fn great!
He is a computer scientist and artificial intelligence researcher currently working with Liquid AI. He has previously done research at Harvard, MIT, Intel, and the AI Foundation.