The Sunday afternoon symposium, called “worthy successor”, revolved around provocative idea From the entrepreneur Daniel Faggella: the “moral objective” of the advanced age should be to create such a powerful and wise form of intelligence that “you would like to gladly prefer that (not humanity) determines the future path of life itself”.
Faggella clarified the theme in her invitation. “This event is very focused on the posthuman transition,” wrote me through X DMS. “Not on agi that acts eternally as a tool for humanity.”
A party full of futuristic fantasies, in which participants discuss the end of humanity as a logistical rather than metaphorical problem, could be described as a niche. If you live in San Francisco and work in AI, then this is a typical Sunday.
About 100 guests took care of non -alcohol cocktails and gnawed cheese dishes near the windows from the floor to the ceiling overlooking the Pacific Ocean before gathering to listen to three interviews on the future of intelligence. A participant showed off a shirt that said “Kurzweil was right”, apparently a reference to Ray Kurzweil, the futurist who provided that the machines will exceed human intelligence in the coming years. Another wore a shirt that said “Does this help us to reach the safe agi?” Accompanied by a thinking face emoji.
Faggella told Wired that he launched this event because “the big workshops, the people who know that Agi is probably ending up for humanity, do not talk about it because the incentives do not allow it” and referred to the first comments of technological leaders such as Elon Musk, Sam Altman and Demis Hassabis, who “were all quite frank of the possibility of killing everything.” Now that incentives must compete, he says: “They are all short to all the problem to build it”. (To be honest, Musk Still speaks of the risks Associated with the advanced, even if this did not prevent him from running in front).
On LinkedIn, Faggella boasted A list of guests dotted with stars, with founders of artificial intelligence, researchers from all the best workshops of Ai Westerners and “most important philosophical thinkers on agi”.
The first speaker, Ginevera DavisA writer based in New York warned that human values could be impossible to translate into AI. The machines may never understand what it means to be conscious, he said, and try to hardly codify human preferences in future systems could be short -sighted. Instead, he proposed an idea with a high sound called “cosmic alignment”, a construction of artificial intelligence that can seek deeper and more universal values that we have not yet discovered. His slides often showed an image apparently generated by the AI of a techno-uch, with a group of humans gathered on a grass shots overlooking a futuristic city in the distance.
The critics of the conscience will say that large models are simply stochastic parrots: a metaphor coined by a group of researchers, some of whom have worked on Google, who wrote In a famous newspaper That LLM do not actually understand the language and are only probabilistic machines. But that debate was not part of the symposium, in which the speakers took as an idea that the superintendency is coming and fast.
Discover more from Gautam Kalal
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Be First to Comment