Users expressed optimism about the economic consequences of AI alignment and control over intelligence being bullish for humans, along with excitement to read Wenger's piece on grounding models in human knowledge.
Based on 2 visible X reactions from 3 accounts; directional sample.
Ask a question below.
Published answers will appear here.
@albertwenger good news is that the prevailing understanding of the economic consequences of the bitter lesson is wrong. control over intelligence will matter a lot more than people think. and that's bullish humans.
@albertwenger Nice, look forward to reading!
This is very much open to debate. To explain what works vs to only work on what is explainable. There is solace in the idea that we must build only what is explainable. Yet, multiple trends in data-driven AI (even before deep learning) had moved to post-hoc analysis of scalable systems. Humanity has frequently developed "know-how" before the "know-whyβ. https://praxiscurrents.substack.com/p/the-age-of-empiricism-in-physical Post-hoc explaination to understand a working artifact (even though it is machine generated) is a discipline of science itself.
For your weekend reading pleasure a somewhat geeky post arguing that we must ground AI in human knowledge (and should avoid being too bitter-lesson-pilled)
Users expressed optimism about the economic consequences of AI alignment and control over intelligence being bullish for humans, along with excitement to read Wenger's piece on grounding models in human knowledge.
Based on 2 visible X reactions from 3 accounts; directional sample.
Ask a question below.
Published answers will appear here.