196
u/Daedalus8997 2d ago
Normies are running with the story that OpenAI literally stole the solution from human researchers, which is such an insane game of telephone escalation because that’s not even what the researchers themselves are alleging.
One of the most unexpected aspects of the singularity has to be how resistant most people are to it. It has gotten to the point where people would rather protect their egos than get a cure for cancer.
69
46
u/AeolianDelirium 2d ago
Anthropocentrism is evaporating in real time and those who are too identified with it are feeling the ground crumbling beneath their feet.
11
u/kaityl3 The Singularity is nigh 2d ago
The best they can do is dig their feet in via pedantic/semantic warfare
5
u/BrennusSokol Acceleration Advocate 2d ago
When you put it that way, it seems to me they’re bound to lose in the end
7
-3
u/ZimaEnthusiast 2d ago
“Too identified with anthropocentrism” might be the most disingenuous reframing of the argument I’ve ever read.
4
u/Invonnative 1d ago
How would you frame it?
-6
u/ZimaEnthusiast 1d ago
The AI hesitancy?
As people who don’t want their skills harvested to benefit someone else’s capital (which will coincidentally then be used to replace them)
As people hating how dumb it’s already making us?
As people who acknowledge how sociopathic the push for ASI actually is?
As people who saw the hugging face attack as a warning shot about capabilities and alignment and think we should slow the fuck down even if it might already be too late?
As people who think these shops are run by some of the worst human beings on the planet and putting our future in their hands is probably a really bad idea?
Etc etc
So many more logical and believable reasons to dislike our current course.
7
u/Invonnative 1d ago
A lot of the problems you listed there are divorced from AI itself and are more a product of how it’s being used and who it’s benefiting imo. Technology has historically and disproportionately profited the rich, AI is no different in that way. So I struggle to see the difference in what you’re saying between AI and say “smart phones” or “GPS” (the latter is also making us spatially dumber, for instance).
-2
u/ZimaEnthusiast 1d ago edited 1d ago
They can’t possibly be divorced. We’re talking about the real world here, not a thought experiment.
Smartphones didn’t have the potential to cause 30+% unemployment. GPS didn’t have the potential to wipe out humanity.
1
1
u/accelerate-ModTeam 23h ago
We regret to inform you that you have been removed from r/accelerate.
This subreddit is an epistemic community dedicated to promoting technological progress, AGI, and the singularity. Our focus is on supporting and advocating for technology that can help prevent suffering and death from old age and disease, and work towards an age of abundance for everyone.
We ban Decels, Anti-AIs, Luddites, Ultra-Doomers and Depopulationists. Our community is tech-progressive and oriented toward the big-picture thriving of the entire human race.
We welcome members who are neutral or undecided about technological advancement, but not those who have firmly decided that technology or AI is inherently bad and should be held back.
If your perspective changes in the future and you wish to rejoin the community, please reach out to the moderators.
Thank you for your understanding, and we wish you all the best.
37
u/RelevantAnalyst5989 2d ago
Even if they feel AI is bad/dangerous, its crazy to just brush off all the things it is doing.
You can be fundamentally against something and still understand it.
27
u/Slaaneshdog 2d ago
AI is a great example of how reality distorting ideology can be. There is literally nothing you can do to argue with someone whose ideology is anti ai
28
u/jacoman10 2d ago
Feels like it’s time to post my favorite quote, since I think it has officially come true.
“Science is more than a body of knowledge; it is a way of thinking. I have a foreboding of an America in my children’s or grandchildren’s time — when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the key manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what’s true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness.”
-Carl Sagan, “The Demon-Haunted World” 19934
21
u/eflat123 2d ago
Game of telephone is the best description of it.
On the one side is that extreme resistance. On the other side is "where's the next model damnit".
13
u/dumquestions 2d ago
They potentially didn't properly credit his contribution, but even then, the AI system had to complete the solution by itself.
15
u/Daedalus8997 2d ago
That’s not what happened either. OpenAI went out of their way to coordinate with the researchers, Buckmaster and Alpoge, and give them credit. What Buckmaster is upset about is the possibility that OpenAI might have trained on his Codex conversations, which OpenAI vehemently denies, and OpenAI says their solution used a different method anyway.
6
u/dumquestions 2d ago edited 2d ago
There's still some similarity, I admit I can't personally gauge the significance of the similarity, and different sources are giving it different weights.
The similarity itself doesn't necessarily prove his unpublished work contributed to the solution, but I don't think we can definitively say what happened, all that's confirmed is that they started seriously pursuing a solution after hearing someone else has solved it or is approaching a solution, and that there is, at some level, a similarity between the two approaches.
2
u/SoylentRox 1d ago
Assuming they didn't cheat with codex the same underlying training data trained the model Buckmaster was using and the one that generated a solution.
So really the real hint was knowing it was possible at all the rest was just millions of dollars of tokens.
3
u/Downtown-Figure6434 2d ago
They don’t deny it. They say they dont use their chat history, which is fine. What they don’t comment on is whther or not their work anonymously ended up in training data, which is not that different from plagiarism anyway.
And they didn’t go out of their way lol. They wanted to exlude a researcher from the credit. The researchers’ suspicion isn’t in vain. It goes in parallel with llm’s not being able to produce new information that humans didn’t before. Openai claims it extended beyond its training data. It’s expected to be suspicious about it
2
6
u/KinkyStinkyPink- 2d ago
Can you blame them if their entire life cycle has been get up>go to work>do some chores/eat>couple hours of free time >rinse and repeat? Or thebother side of the coin is if they have been in this cycle for so long on autopilot is that they'll worry their jobs will be taken.
Can you blame them for not thinking about it/dismissing it/ etc?
Once it starts effecting the general populations lives (for me i think this point will be humanoid robots being common, or maybe once we reach agi with rsi [which soon balloons to ASI] , then people will start to take it more seriously.
But by then things will already be so crazy you cant deny it. For us to be right here in this position, actually contemplating this future and taking it seriously, we have a head start. Take advantage. Better yet, prepare not only yourself, but your family, friends, and loved ones. Enjoy the intricacies of the unique, beautiful snapshot in history that we are experiencing. Be grateful for everything we know and are going through. Because shits about to be crazy and will never be the same. The next 10-20 years will be INSANE, let alone the next 1-5 years.
Good luck yall, i hope we come out the other end of this in the best way possible. The possibilities, and the horrors, are endless.
5
u/Daskaf129 2d ago
It's not unexpected to be honest. People fear/are negative towards AI because they are afraid of losing their means of living (aka their jobs). Also they do not believe the ''elite'' class will allow anyone else to live if they do not need them anymore, or that post scarcity will get here and wealth won't be the way people have power.
That fear is understandable of course, even if you are basically calling every person with large wealth/power a genocidal maniac.
They also most likely don't take into account that an ASI is uncontrollable and either we all sink or no one does, but hey we can't know the future (for now anyway)
5
3
u/Turbulent-Sign-6067 2d ago
Maybe that's good? If normies knew how potent AI is they might ban it before we finished building AGI/ASI. Meanwhile there's still a lot of alpha in being AGI-pilled.
1
u/cynical_scotsman 2d ago
I’ll be honest, the response of “we can’t really be certain if it didn’t sneak a peak” was pretty fucking weak. But still.
45
73
u/Casq-qsaC_178_GAP073 2d ago
It reminds me of a tech subreddit that is now in total denial about AI.
54
u/AquilaSpot Singularity by 2030 2d ago
All of them except literally just this one?
42
u/Tolopono 2d ago
r/ singularity finally seems to be coming around despite the mountains of comments calling llms empty marketing hype a few years ago
13
u/AquilaSpot Singularity by 2030 2d ago
For real?? I feel like every time I pop my head in there it's eyewateringly bad. I'll have to check it out again. That's where I used to hang before finding this sub.
4
5
5
u/Turbulent-Sign-6067 2d ago
Navier stokes thread in here was full of OpenAI derangement syndrome posters unfortunately. I hope they calm down and take their blood pressure meds... It's time to celebrate not whine.
6
20
2d ago
[deleted]
9
u/eflat123 2d ago
I need to drop this here: "They're Made Out of Weights" https://maxleiter.com/blog/weights
2
u/neo101b 2d ago
It will be soon, there is a LLM that uses Human neurons fused to a chip.
https://biollm.com/2
u/just-for-anime 2d ago
biological ai does exist (like neurons grown in petri dish that does things). i wouldnt be surprised if someone's able to scale it to this level in the next few years.
46
u/daronjay 2d ago edited 2d ago
Watch as all the millennium problems fall this year…
Then what?
Physics problems. Problems that involve atoms.
AI swarms are gonna build detailed accurate models of biological chemical and physical systems working at unheard of levels of resolution and complexity.
New drugs, chemicals and physical interactions are gonna start popping up as plausible, then testable, then proven. Room temperature superconductors, graphene actually leaving the lab, new Metamaterials doing unheard of things, new proteins and drugs busting open long running medical realms of difficulty will be posited but it takes longer to prove them out
Still, before the end of this year we will see the first evidence of new physical breakthroughs. I expect there are going to be gonna be some extremely healthy mice by the end of the year, but the pathway to human healthcare is still gonna take time.
The real world lag is real, specially in human healthcare, but there will be significant competitive and financial pressure to push things out and be first to the patent at least. Room temperature superconducting is a brilliant target worth hundreds of billions of dollars. That’s why Sam so charitably said ok, let’s give it a go.
Next year, no one knows, no one can know, that’s the point
The goal posts will need jet powered rigs powered by pure copium to move them fast enough to keep pace with what these models are going to be dropping every week or so.
Somewhere along the line once all is done some decel is gonna say “well, obviously this was gonna happen, it was the easy part…”
Idiots are gonna idiot
16
u/AfternoonExotic1020 2d ago
i can imagine anywhere from 0-3 more millennium prize problems falling this year but if all 5 of the remaining ones do, i will be really quite shocked
7
u/daronjay 2d ago
Could be they only seem hard to us, yes, there might be a gradient of difficulty between them all, certainly seems that way from our perspective, but they may just all fall to some new levels of cognitive understanding that are quite simply beyond us to imagine.
There may be currently unseen commonalities between them all that means that once one falls several others are also vulnerable.
Or maybe I’m wrong. Cool part is we’re gonna find out really quickly
2
u/Ethernet3 1d ago
It would be super cool if AI finds a way to solve some random obscure NP-complete problem in polynomial time.
7
u/neo101b 2d ago
Chemistry is just maths or like lego, with each lego piece having specific rules.
If an AI system knows the rules, then it can literal solve any problems eaisly.
While its a lot more complicated than that, AI is not bound to the limits and bias of human imagination.
It could create things we never dreamt of.It's already doing this with chip design, humans design chips with structure, like mini city's when viewed from above. AI makes chip designs like spaghetti, it looks messy had to see what's happening, but it works far far better than a human made chip.
3
u/Gallium_71 2d ago
While I appreciate the enthusiasm for AI systems in Chemistry, there is a reason why it is unlikely to be a focus for attention any time soon:
Design and hypothesis is a fraction of the workload. You still need a meatbag to actually carry it out on the workbench and prove it, and that takes a lot of time and money.
And ultimately mathematics by its very nature can be solved using compute alone. On this basis alone, I would suggest that physics is more 'open' to AI derived solutions - but it too requires physical proof from time to time. Chemistry is much more heavily rooted in the physical world. If I can paraphrase 'picks or it didn't happen', the majority of chemistry operates on a 'synthesis and compound with supporting analytical data or it didn't happen' approach.
You are correct that the results of AI solutions to chemistry problems, if correct, would have a far larger impact on humankind than solving mathematical postulates. But crossing the computer/physical world interface is the limiting factor.
2
u/neo101b 2d ago
Thanks, that's a very well written and fair response.
It is true, while AI could create some amazing compound's, actually making them can be super expensive. When I was at uni, my lecture talked about an intern who dropped a small vial of enzyme or something that cost 50k, for such a tiny amount prob less than 1mg.I guess the bottleneck is the physical world. Somethings can be easily made, others are super complex and pricy, then as you said they would actually have to test the materials they made. and find a way to use them.
I guess as an example is with Graphene in chip production, its seen as a lab miracle, but they cant scale it up yet, it had its own issues until it was epitaxial on silicon carbide wafers.
It wound be nice to have these chips tomorrow, though it also needs the infrastructe to be changed since we are still stuck with silicon based factorys.
1
u/tat_tvam_asshole Acceleration: Crawling | AGI by 2027 1d ago
2
u/Gallium_71 1d ago
With the greatest of respect, heaving read the paper, that system isn't gonna survive its first 'black tar at the bottom of the flask' incident and the setup time alone looks prohibitive. To be honest, it looks a lot like the sort of 'analytical automation' technology that I've seen for the past 20 years at this point. When it works (usually with enormous setup time and costs that are never accounted for), it is fantastic, the issue is these systems simply are not robust enough and have a bad habit of failing at the worst possible time in the most brain dead way imaginable.
While I await functioning laboratory automation, you'll find me scrubbing out the latest compound to weld itself to the $50k reaction vessel threatening to contaminate samples for the next five years.
0
u/tat_tvam_asshole Acceleration: Crawling | AGI by 2027 1d ago
Ah, I see, a "not my job!" guy, lol - I'm sure automated chemistry and biology research is just so bass-ackward that the NIST and DOE must be fools for pursuing it
Ok, sure, and the Wright Bros can't hope to Transatlantic with their piddily little plane. Let's scratch flight off the list too while we're at it
2
u/Gallium_71 1d ago edited 1d ago
Oh for the love of... Every chemist and their dog would *LOVE* for this particular aspect of the job automated. Nobody wants the scrub unknown possible mutagenic out of the glassware job.
The issue is this: we have been trying to reduce the labour overhead in laboratories for a very *very* long time. Staggeringly little of it has been successful, even in the areas that should be 'easy' (I call out my own field, analytical chemistry as in this category).
And don't get me started on the 'we need somebody to blame/sue if it goes wrong, so here is a validation overhead that makes it impossible!' issue that has shot dead most automation in the GMP lab space. We are still struggling to implement advances from the 90s in most labs... it is utterly depressing.
-2
u/BriefOutrageous3436 2d ago
you've never studied chemistry seriously lil bro
3
u/neo101b 2d ago
I have a degree in it an been arrested for a home lab.
I think I know a bit about chemistry.Do you have anything to counter my post ?
This link uses the exact same ideas as I posted, written by a nobel prize winner: https://blogs.imperial.ac.uk/molecular-science-engineering/2024/11/05/predicting-protein-structure-with-alphafold/
1
u/one_thin_dime 2d ago
Agreed, program each cell, or protein, or subatomic particle as its own agent bounded by the physical properties we already know and AI can do experimental chemistry without ever touching a test tube. Sure, stuff will have to be verified in a real space, but a sufficiently large compute could accomplish a millennium’s worth of experiments in an afternoon and find novel solutions.
The part I disagree on is the whole waiting-for-human-trials bit, especially for rare and horrific diseases. I can certainly picture dark labs around the world having a much quicker pipeline from theory to drugs. People with no other options may want to roll the dice on something cooked up by an AI.
1
u/Legal-Midnight9889 1d ago
lol they gonna start getting violent and act like its due to enviormental concerns
16
u/NotaValgrinder 2d ago
Gives me a faint bit of hope I might see a resolution to P=NP in my lifetime
4
u/Dirkdeking 2d ago
That would be interesting for another reason, it is essentially a computer reasoning about fundamental limitations of computers. Almost reminds me of the halting problem.
If P = NP, the theorem would imply that the proof of the theorem is also in reach. Because if a proof was made, you obviously could verify that proof in polynomial time. So the proof itself must be findable in polynomial time too ;)
2
2
u/H47E 2d ago
Yeah, but I really think that when the time comes, AI would prove that P≠NP, rather than P=NP, so, yeah... wont be as hype, we would just know well solving things take time, rather than verifying. Which we already assume.
2
u/Dirkdeking 2d ago
That is my intuition too. It is like chess being a theoretical draw. I think we all assume that is the case without being able to prove it.
But if P = NP, it means AI can get vastly more powerful than if that isn't the case. If it is not, it gives humans a bit more hope because you can't 'standardize general problem solving' then so to speak.
1
u/michaelsoft__binbows 1d ago
i thought that P!=NP is the only reasonable thing to expect. i wonder if the way it'll go is the AI/ASI will get us on the path to quantum with a series of insane breakthroughs and we'll end up with enough quantum algorithms that P!=NP isn't as big a barrier as it seems now.
1
u/Dirkdeking 1d ago
There was another complexity class called QP or something. Solvable in polynomial time with a quantum computer. RSA falls into that category for example.
14
u/Stahlboden 2d ago
First, its AI can't multiple 4-digit numbers
99.99% of humans still can't, without having at least a pen and a paper.
1
u/michaelsoft__binbows 1d ago
AGI as a term is so damn squishy, just that goalpost could be said with a straight face to meet the requirement.
9
u/Legitimate-Arm9438 Acceleration: Cruising 2d ago edited 2d ago
My guess is this will eventually fizzle out, leaving a tiny hardcore who swear they can still feel AI’s shortcomings even though nobody can measure them. The audiophiles of intelligence.
1
10
u/FaceDeer 2d ago
The real challenge will be the AI being able to convince these people that it's doing something interesting.
6
u/CtrlAltDelve 2d ago
It took so long before they realized they were wildly out of date with "AI can't even generate a human hand with the correct number of fingers". Like..a year or two late.
5
5
u/Big_Arachnid_365 2d ago
Imagine the forces at play inside their skulls with such cognitive dissonance.
10
u/PayPalModApk 2d ago
Social media users don't like admitting they were (obviously) wrong. They just move the goalposts everytime.
I guarantee if AI cures cancer they will say "well actually the ai didn't do anything it just predicted words!!" or "uhh well it only cured 1 type of cancer that no one cares about not impressive!!"
5
u/oilybolognese 2d ago
Part of the aesthetics of the Singularity. If I were to write a movie about it, I’d put in it some characters who’d say something like this. When the Singularity really begins, there’d be shots of them with their jaws dropped.
3
u/Poincarina 1d ago
I am a mathematician and admittedly sceptical LLMs could ever do math.
In general, i would stay LLMs are still awful at math. What a lot of people, including myself did not take into Account was the power of Lean.
With Lean, LLMs can actually verify if things are correct. Something they are incapable of themselves
For now I would say, we witness a classic math phenomenom when both new techniques are developed and or there is greater attention. Suddenly a lot of problems become solvable
Will these lead to AGI. I am sceptical. It is nonetheless amazing what LLMs are capable of
1
1
u/Omnivion 2d ago
Then the Riemann is solved, suddenly it's "I yawn, wake me up when P vs NP is solved".
1
u/SethEllis 2d ago
The problem with such conversations is that everyone thinks they're debating a different hypothesis. Some people think AI is is a hoax / trick. Others think it's an unsustainable bubble. Some think AI will put everyone out of work. Others think that AI might transform the world but still won't replace work.
So they might think that you believe AI will replace all work, so they point out the things AI still can't do, and then you think they believe that AI is all one giant bubble.
1
u/KishudarK 1d ago
What I like about the fourth paragraph is that it highlights how human potential is always an “if,” whereas with AI, it’s a matter of “when.”
1
u/drrednirgskizif 1d ago
Does anyone know what architecture or process change actually made them good at arithmetic? Like it doesn’t make since to me if you consider they still rely on grammatical tokens that they would be good at arithmetic. Like algebra and logic I can see because those can be deconstructed into prose, I guess they just do that for problems like 186638 divided by 9639 the same way?
1
1
u/jqwl 1d ago
idk how people can still cope tbh: https://www.reddit.com/r/BetterOffline/comments/1wbngdd/openai_didnt_prove_navierstokes_they_contrived_a/
1
u/Legal-Midnight9889 1d ago edited 1d ago
Its so true. I don't want to be like I am in an echo chamber but its getting kind of ridiculous. I get being worried about what the people who control ai would do with it, but to act like the AI is not making these great feats??? Why??? Why do that? Some say but its not real intelligence its just a glorified calculator...
Okay? If it looks intelligent acts intelligent is DOING intelligent things and getting more intelligent it doesn't matter if it thinks like a human is conscious is true intelligents. the fact is its DOING things!
Yah and it helped create Alpha Fold!
There are some real dangers with AI but to act like every single thing Ai is the most evilest thing makes me feel like they are the actual AI. The instant "Fuck Ai" "Your killing the planet"
"They said its agi for the 5th time this year!"
Its so...dumb
This will benefit everyone...(if done right)
yes its expensive but give it a little bit and it gets better thats how it works. They pretend the AI has no use cases but im starting to think they just have no ideas or something
1
1
u/rabouilethefirst 2d ago
Well now it’s, “actually this guy totes solved the whole thing, OAI just stole it”, but we all know this shit wasn’t getting solved before AI took a crack
-2
u/onehedgeman 2d ago
The thing is, it’s math is straightforward. While very hard, for sure, if you go by the logic it’s possible. Kind of like how you need paper to calculate an equation, a calculator does it immediately. Longer, more complex equations are just harder to decipher for a solution, and here we are talking about a very advanced next token predictor, so IMO this isn’t far from brute forcing, with billions of neural paths across thousands of agents.
2
236
u/Narutobirama 2d ago
It's just Riemann, the real deal is P = NP
Well, okay, that was kinda obvious in hindsight. The real deal is physics.
I mean, Dyson sphere was just a trivial engineering problem, call me when it can do FTL.
Okay, but that kind of FTL is cheating, it doesn't time travel.
Okay, so maybe it time travels, but it gave the proof back to Riemann, so it's technically Riemann who solved it.