What “game over” for the latest paradigm in AI might look like (garymarcus.substack.com) 5 points by FlawedReformer 3y ago ↗ HN
[–] raydiatian 3y ago ↗ Paywalled, care to summarize for us? [–] genezeta 3y ago ↗ > This week I saw not one but three striking premonitions for how the scaling maximalism hypothesis might end.> 1. There might not be enough data in the world to make scaling maximalism work. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2209.12407.pdf> 2. There might not be enough available compute in the world to make scaling maximalism feasible.> 3. Some important tasks might simply not scale. https://arxiv.org/abs/2002.06177Note: scaling maximalism hypothesis -> "that AGI might arise from larger scale without fundamental new innovation" [–] raydiatian 3y ago ↗ > Some important tasks simply may not scaleReminds me of that concept Steven Wolfram introduced me to called computational irreducibility [–] abudabi123 3y ago ↗ A low hanging fruit for A.I. to remove is to debunk the received wisdom of economic sophistry holding back the feelers to the next step change. [–] raydiatian 3y ago ↗ I’ll be honest, I have no idea what you’re trying to say here. Care to elaborate?
[–] genezeta 3y ago ↗ > This week I saw not one but three striking premonitions for how the scaling maximalism hypothesis might end.> 1. There might not be enough data in the world to make scaling maximalism work. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2209.12407.pdf> 2. There might not be enough available compute in the world to make scaling maximalism feasible.> 3. Some important tasks might simply not scale. https://arxiv.org/abs/2002.06177Note: scaling maximalism hypothesis -> "that AGI might arise from larger scale without fundamental new innovation" [–] raydiatian 3y ago ↗ > Some important tasks simply may not scaleReminds me of that concept Steven Wolfram introduced me to called computational irreducibility [–] abudabi123 3y ago ↗ A low hanging fruit for A.I. to remove is to debunk the received wisdom of economic sophistry holding back the feelers to the next step change. [–] raydiatian 3y ago ↗ I’ll be honest, I have no idea what you’re trying to say here. Care to elaborate?
[–] raydiatian 3y ago ↗ > Some important tasks simply may not scaleReminds me of that concept Steven Wolfram introduced me to called computational irreducibility [–] abudabi123 3y ago ↗ A low hanging fruit for A.I. to remove is to debunk the received wisdom of economic sophistry holding back the feelers to the next step change. [–] raydiatian 3y ago ↗ I’ll be honest, I have no idea what you’re trying to say here. Care to elaborate?
[–] abudabi123 3y ago ↗ A low hanging fruit for A.I. to remove is to debunk the received wisdom of economic sophistry holding back the feelers to the next step change. [–] raydiatian 3y ago ↗ I’ll be honest, I have no idea what you’re trying to say here. Care to elaborate?
[–] raydiatian 3y ago ↗ I’ll be honest, I have no idea what you’re trying to say here. Care to elaborate?
5 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 22.4 ms ] thread> 1. There might not be enough data in the world to make scaling maximalism work. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2209.12407.pdf
> 2. There might not be enough available compute in the world to make scaling maximalism feasible.
> 3. Some important tasks might simply not scale. https://arxiv.org/abs/2002.06177
Note: scaling maximalism hypothesis -> "that AGI might arise from larger scale without fundamental new innovation"
Reminds me of that concept Steven Wolfram introduced me to called computational irreducibility