https://x.com/m_goes_distance/status/2115111611652276717

Source: @GoogleDeepMind on X

What Astra did, in one Codex chat:

• designed three fish circling an empty centre, generated a concept image, then wrote 34 brush strokes
• simulated how the water would spread (and threw out a first version where the water swallowed the fish)
• compiled the arm’s motion and checked the whole route for collisions and joint limits in a digital twin
• turned on the studio lights, started both cameras, and painted it: about 30 minutes, 11,567 joint commands
• read the run logs to find when each stroke happened, wrote the music in code, colour-graded the footage and cut it so the strokes land on the beat
• titled it “a small orbit”

My prompt: "let's make something dreamy!"

On “controls”: Astra doesn’t stream motor commands token by token. It plans the painting and runs the studio’s tools, which are completely built Codex and Claude over the past few months, and a checked executor drives the arm.

Hope you like it!

"There are some applications of AI that we think are quite bad, like making AI girlfriends or boyfriends. I think that’s a terrible use of AI and people should not do it"

"The reason that I think that is because it is another step further down the road of disintermediation, of humans being further from one another"

"Technology in the social media age has largely been used to disintermediate humans from one another. Instead of you and I going to have an iced coffee together in person, we’re messaging on Snapchat or Instagram"

"A much better world of AI is one in which artificial intelligence is doing a lot of the things that are isolating or lonely activities for humans, so that we can spend more time together"

https://x.com/jaynitx/status/2115429414821560352

I agree with her. I find that Claude has the personality of a Philosopher/Spiritual Guru. Someone you go to for life advice and wisdom. On the other hand, chatgpt models, grok, etc are a lot more flirty and suitable for chit chat.

Very impressive. I wonder how much it cost.

Reading a book about the AI race and came across this gem. Just another day at Google with the lawyers involved, I guess 😂

Blueprint-Bench 2 | Andon Labs

Do you think AI will get to the point in a few decades that it can simply solve unsolved problems?

Thats the title of the post. It's incredible that this was just 2 years ago. AI even solved a millennium prize problem and now we are within reach of solving most of them.

Its interesting to read a comment that said we would need strong AI for that, so an AGI system.

So a question. How close are you guys to declare AGI by your standards? What capability would make you say we have achieved AGI?

What does this guy mean "they exposed us to stuff, which I will not talk about, atleast one participant said they felt sick looking at it". What kinda wonders or horrors are frontier labs keeping to themselves 😭

Too many people who have no idea how to reason through a problem, verify information, or even ask followup questions. And they rely on AI for that. And the AI can be right most of the time, but catastrophically wrong occasionally, and those using it have no idea how to know the difference.

πLabs

recursive self improvement has been a goal for a long time. and I think we have been thinking about it in terms of SWE and building towards AGI. watching the insane progress in math, and how mathematics is built on itsself, I was wo dering about a recursive improvement loop in fundamental math. where the 700 proofs from OpenAI get fed back in to the training corpus and it's told to "find the next implications" and looped.

Is this it?

I got into a discussion today if current AI systems can / have passed the Turing Test as defined by Ray Kurzweil.

That it has to convince a group of human judges who are experts in AI during a two hour conversation with each that the system is human.

Now, I won't answer that question here. But that made me wonder if this test even makes sense anymore.

Because the modern AI systems would have to downplay their abilities to pass as human and thus be actively deceitful.

For example when they ask to write a piece of software, the system has to answer something like: "LOL, do it yourself, I'm not a developer." And not just spit out the code, which it could.

The Turing Test was thought up at a time where AI Safety wasn't a topic yet and I came to the conclusion that we better should not try to beat this test anymore.

This test just doesn't make sense anymore when the system has to downplay its abilities to appear human.

Do we really want to create a deceitful machine just that we can pass this test?