AGI被过度炒作了吗？
我不断听到关于通用人工智能（AGI）将如何改变游戏规则，以及它将立即导致危险的超人工智能（ASI）的讨论。我甚至听到一些几乎对人工智能工作原理一无所知的人也在谈论这些。我自己并不是专家，但我认为对人工智能如何计算和存储信息有一个基本的理解，会极大地改变我们的视角。
首先，什么是通用人工智能（AGI）？我从未听过一个令人满意的定义。有些人说它是与人类一样聪明或通用的人工智能；有些人说它是有意识的人工智能。我不明白根据这些定义，它如何能被视为一个“步骤”，因为常规人工智能和通用人工智能之间并没有实质性的变化。要使人工智能更具通用性，只需使输入的标记化更细致，改变训练方法，并可能在其上添加某种迭代框架以使其能够做更多的事情。此外，人工智能在几乎所有方面的能力都已经超过了人类，除了规模。
我个人认为，这只是一个炒作词，是奥特曼（Altman）为了获得更多资金和对OpenAI的关注而不断传播的。即使你打个响指，拥有正确的训练机制和网络等来实现AGI/ASI，我觉得它在技术上也不会比人类更聪明。人工智能已经在相对较少的计算能力下让大多数人通过智商测试，但那是因为智商测试是通过比较能力来获得相对智力的；它们并不测试计算能力。
基于这个假设，如果人工智能在计算能力上无法超过人类，那么可以安全地说，我们暂时不会拥有有意识的计算机，而是一些表现得像有意识的计算机。那是否意味着，从今往后，人工智能只是一个浪费，只会从人们手中夺取控制权，而对我们没有实质性的好处？五年后的ChatGPT会是什么样子？我是否只需输入“帮我报税”，它就会在我的电脑上随意操作，直到我的税务完成？为什么我会希望这样的系统，而不是一个由会计师设计的、每次都能正确报税的系统？我知道的一件事是，人工智能的速度非常慢，人工智能很棒，但你真的需要思考，我们实际上只是构建了一个巨大的字典家伙，他将面临与人类员工相同的问题。
我不知道，只是在随意表达想法，我很想听听那些真正设计这些东西的专家的看法。
查看原文
I keep hearing about how AGI is going to change the game and how it's going to immediately lead to a dangerous ASI. I even hear it from people I know who know almost nothing about how AI works. I am no pro myself, but I think having a fundamental understanding of how AI computes and stores information changes the perspective greatly.<p>Firstly, what is AGI? I've never heard a decent definition. Some say it's an AI that is as smart or as general as humans; some say it's an AI that's conscious. I don't see how it could be a "step" by these definitions because nothing actually changes between a regular AI and an AGI. To make AI more general, you just make the input tokenization more granular, change the training method, and perhaps add some kind of iterative framework on top to make it do more stuff. Also, AI is already more capable than humans in almost every way except scale.<p>I personally think that it's just a hype word that Altman spammed to get more funding and interest in OpenAI. Even if you snapped your fingers and had the right training mechanism and the right networks etc for an AGI/ASI, I get the feeling it wouldn't even be smarter than people in the technical sense. AI already blows most people out of an IQ test at a fraction of the computational power of a brain, but that's because IQ tests compare competence to get relative intelligence; they don't test computation.<p>With that assumption, if AI can't be computationally stronger than humans, it's safe to say we won't have conscious computers for a while, but instead computers that act consciously instead. Does that mean that AI from hear on out is a waste that does nothing but take control from people while benefiting us the same? What is ChatGPT going to look like in 5 years? Am I just going to type in "do my taxes," and it's just going to do whatever it wants on my pc until my taxes are done? Why would I ever want that over a system designed to do my taxes correctly EVERY TIME by accountants? One thing I know about AI is it is slow as a mf, AI is great but you really have to think, we really just built a giant dictionary guy who's going to have the same problems human employees have.<p>I don't know just kind of spewing thoughts, I'd love to hear from people who are actual experts in designing these things.