Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

“An AI that can act before it understands is not reliable infrastructure.” Yann LeCun, Meta’s Chief AI Scientist and one of the fathers of modern deep learning, says current LLMs are intrinsically unsafe. Not because they are evil, but because they hallucinate, lack common sense, and cannot reliably predict... show more

Jon Hernandez

26,231 subscribers

10,511 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

14 Kommentare

Profilbild von Jon Hernandez

Jon Hernandezvor 4 Monaten

Source:

Profilbild von Christian | ECHO Consulting

Christian | ECHO Consultingvor 4 Monaten

This is why we focused on building the infrastructure before the prompt lands so it hits every time and hallucinations are avoided.

Profilbild von Maciek Telecki

Maciek Teleckivor 4 Monaten

ChatGPT lens visualization. So good someone talks about that.

Profilbild von Little Yoda

Little Yodavor 4 Monaten

Yann LeCun admits the flaw: LLMs are unanchored. They can act, but they cannot understand consequences. You cannot build reliable infrastructure when the "Hand" operates without the "Mind." The tech fiat system is trying to give the machine autonomy. The Digital Dharma demands we give it only utility. The Human must remain the anchor. Behavior is the only proof of reality.

Profilbild von Madhavvan

Madhavvanvor 4 Monaten

Exactly

Profilbild von Harry Tandy

Harry Tandyvor 4 Monaten

LeCun standing firm against the current hype train again

Profilbild von Grebe

Grebevor 4 Monaten

useful only when boxed in tight enough

Profilbild von David J.

David J.vor 4 Monaten

You cannot build reliable systems on a probabilistic guess. Agents without a world model are just fancy random number generators.

Profilbild von AzGoum

AzGoumvor 4 Monaten

I don't understand how his JETA model works around the flaws he mentions. If an AI (LLM, JETA, call it what you want) thinks it understands, it will act and do potential damage. No matter what heuristic you choose, you still need permissions and limitations to frame its actions.

Profilbild von Hamad Al Rumaithi

Hamad Al Rumaithivor 4 Monaten

LeCun is right. AI without reliability is not innovation, it is a hazard. Public safety demands systems that understand before they act.

Profilbild von MainlyProblematic

MainlyProblematicvor 4 Monaten

Do humans understand before they give commands tho?

Profilbild von Ryan White

Ryan Whitevor 4 Monaten

I think he's basically right. Useful copilot? yes. Reliable infrastructure with agency? not there yet.

Profilbild von Kekko D’Amato

Kekko D’Amatovor 4 Monaten

LeCun's point is valid but context-dependent. Hallucination in a chatbot = annoying. Hallucination in an agent controlling real infrastructure = dangerous. The reliability bar has to scale with the stakes. LLMs as draft tools or assistants are already valuable — as autonomous infrastructure they're premature. Two different conversations happening under the same label.

Profilbild von Martin Szerment | Practical AI

Martin Szerment | Practical AIvor 4 Monaten

When the architect questions his own blueprint, the builders should slow down.

Ähnliche Videos

Yann LeCun says LLMs are intrinsically unsafe because they cannot be made fully reliable They can still hallucinate or take agentic actions without predicting the consequences properly "coding works because you can verify the output, but real-world tasks are harder to verify"

Yann LeCun says LLMs are intrinsically unsafe because they cannot be made fully reliable They can still hallucinate or take agentic actions without predicting the consequences properly "coding works because you can verify the output, but real-world tasks are harder to verify"

Haider.

33,364 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

“LLMs are intrinsically unsafe.” Yann LeCun argues that models that can’t predict the consequences of their actions can’t be made reliable.

“LLMs are intrinsically unsafe.” Yann LeCun argues that models that can’t predict the consequences of their actions can’t be made reliable.

Jacob Effron

42,383 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Yann LeCun says you cannot build a reliable agentic system without a world model LLMs don't have world models. They can't predict the consequences of their actions before taking them "they just act, and whatever happens next is someone else's problem" Without that, it's not intelligence

Yann LeCun says you cannot build a reliable agentic system without a world model LLMs don't have world models. They can't predict the consequences of their actions before taking them "they just act, and whatever happens next is someone else's problem" Without that, it's not intelligence

Haider.

333,367 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Yann LeCun argues that large language models (LLMs) cannot reach human-level or superintelligence just by scaling. He says the current LLM paradigm is hitting its limits. Many researchers are now exploring “agentic systems,” but building them on top of LLMs alone is flawed. LLMs can't plan actions well because they don’t truly understand or predict consequences. To get intelligent behavior, we need something fundamentally different.

Yann LeCun argues that large language models (LLMs) cannot reach human-level or superintelligence just by scaling. He says the current LLM paradigm is hitting its limits. Many researchers are now exploring “agentic systems,” but building them on top of LLMs alone is flawed. LLMs can't plan actions well because they don’t truly understand or predict consequences. To get intelligent behavior, we need something fundamentally different.

Wes Roth

71,871 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Yann LeCun says basing agentic systems on the current LLM paradigm is a recipe for disaster Intelligent behavior requires a world model to predict the consequences of actions, which LLMs do not have "the basic architecture is not there"

Yann LeCun says basing agentic systems on the current LLM paradigm is a recipe for disaster Intelligent behavior requires a world model to predict the consequences of actions, which LLMs do not have "the basic architecture is not there"

Haider.

61,331 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

📁 Yann LeCun, Meta’s Chief AI Scientist and Turing Award winner, says today’s AI only looks intelligent. It is very good at manipulating language. But it still cannot understand the physical world, maintain real memory or truly plan. The next generation of AI will need to understand the world, not just talk about it.

📁 Yann LeCun, Meta’s Chief AI Scientist and Turing Award winner, says today’s AI only looks intelligent. It is very good at manipulating language. But it still cannot understand the physical world, maintain real memory or truly plan. The next generation of AI will need to understand the world, not just talk about it.

Jon Hernandez

22,560 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

NEW - Meta’s former chief AI scientist Yann LeCun says that in the future AI innovation and top scientists will come from India and Africa, as they have "favorable demographics... The youth is the most creative part of humanity. There's a deficit of that in the North, largely."

NEW - Meta’s former chief AI scientist Yann LeCun says that in the future AI innovation and top scientists will come from India and Africa, as they have "favorable demographics... The youth is the most creative part of humanity. There's a deficit of that in the North, largely."

Disclose.tv

1,347,348 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

📁 Yann LeCun, Meta’s chief AI scientist, says the biggest unsolved problem in AI is not low level actions but abstract planning. Humans do not plan a trip from New York to Paris in milliseconds or muscle movements, they think in high level goals like going to the airport and taking a plane, then break them down. This is called hierarchical planning. Animals already do it. AI still cannot.

📁 Yann LeCun, Meta’s chief AI scientist, says the biggest unsolved problem in AI is not low level actions but abstract planning. Humans do not plan a trip from New York to Paris in milliseconds or muscle movements, they think in high level goals like going to the airport and taking a plane, then break them down. This is called hierarchical planning. Animals already do it. AI still cannot.

Jon Hernandez

25,758 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

📁 Demis Hassabis, CEO of DeepMind, says AI is still missing critical capabilities. He explains that current systems cannot plan far ahead or reason like top human scientists, because they lack a deep model of the world. They can process text, images, and video, but they still don’t understand physics, causality, or how actions affect outcomes over time.

📁 Demis Hassabis, CEO of DeepMind, says AI is still missing critical capabilities. He explains that current systems cannot plan far ahead or reason like top human scientists, because they lack a deep model of the world. They can process text, images, and video, but they still don’t understand physics, causality, or how actions affect outcomes over time.

Jon Hernandez

63,766 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Yann LeCun says LLMs are strongest in domains where language itself is the substrate of reasoning, like math and code They can solve problems, prove theorems, and write programs — but they are not creative mathematicians, software architects, or computer scientists "their role is to help humans build"

Yann LeCun says LLMs are strongest in domains where language itself is the substrate of reasoning, like math and code They can solve problems, prove theorems, and write programs — but they are not creative mathematicians, software architects, or computer scientists "their role is to help humans build"

Haider.

348,108 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

📁 Yann LeCun, an expert in artificial intelligence and a pioneer of deep learning, explains that current systems do not understand the physical world and lack real memory or reasoning. He adds that, despite the vast resources spent on training and refining them, they remain far behind the learning ability of a four-year-old child.

📁 Yann LeCun, an expert in artificial intelligence and a pioneer of deep learning, explains that current systems do not understand the physical world and lack real memory or reasoning. He adds that, despite the vast resources spent on training and refining them, they remain far behind the learning ability of a four-year-old child.

Jon Hernandez

24,687 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

Yann LeCun (Yann LeCun) just revealed why he left Meta, Why are LLMs an extremely narrow field, and how "World model" is the way to build really meaningful agentic future. 🎯 Beautiful and simple in 1.5 mints. "I can’t imagine we can build agentic systems without those systems having the ability to predict, in advance, what the consequences of their actions are going to be. The way we act in the world is that we can predict the consequences of our actions, and that’s what allows us to plan. So what is a world model? Given the state of an environment, a system you want to control at time t, and given an action or intervention you imagine taking, can you predict the state of the world (or the system) at time t + 1? If you can, that’s a world model. You don’t do this at a pixel level, if it’s video. You do this in an abstract representation space, and that’s a crucial key insight." --- From 'AI House Davos" YT channel (full link in comment)

Yann LeCun (Yann LeCun) just revealed why he left Meta, Why are LLMs an extremely narrow field, and how "World model" is the way to build really meaningful agentic future. 🎯 Beautiful and simple in 1.5 mints. "I can’t imagine we can build agentic systems without those systems having the ability to predict, in advance, what the consequences of their actions are going to be. The way we act in the world is that we can predict the consequences of our actions, and that’s what allows us to plan. So what is a world model? Given the state of an environment, a system you want to control at time t, and given an action or intervention you imagine taking, can you predict the state of the world (or the system) at time t + 1? If you can, that’s a world model. You don’t do this at a pixel level, if it’s video. You do this in an abstract representation space, and that’s a crucial key insight." --- From 'AI House Davos" YT channel (full link in comment)

Rohan Paul

383,716 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

📁 Yann LeCun, Chief AI Scientist at Meta, says language is not the peak of intelligence, it is the easy part. Predicting the next word is simple because language is made of finite symbols. The real world is continuous, noisy and chaotic, and even a cat navigates it better than our best models. True intelligence begins where text ends.

📁 Yann LeCun, Chief AI Scientist at Meta, says language is not the peak of intelligence, it is the easy part. Predicting the next word is simple because language is made of finite symbols. The real world is continuous, noisy and chaotic, and even a cat navigates it better than our best models. True intelligence begins where text ends.

Jon Hernandez

56,177 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

Yann LeCun says the real world is far more complex than the world of language LLMs can accumulate knowledge, but they fail with high-dimensional, continuous, noisy sensory data "the next revolution is physical AI" Systems that can truly plan, reason, and understand the physical environment

Yann LeCun says the real world is far more complex than the world of language LLMs can accumulate knowledge, but they fail with high-dimensional, continuous, noisy sensory data "the next revolution is physical AI" Systems that can truly plan, reason, and understand the physical environment

Haider.

68,976 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Yann LeCun (AMI Labs Founder): "The AI industry is completely LLM-pilled. Everybody is working on the same thing. They're all digging the same trench." LeCun explains why no lab dares break from the pack: "They are stealing each other's engineers. So they can't afford to do something different because if they start going on a tangent, they're going to fall behind the other guys. And so they're all doing the same thing." This groupthink is exactly what drove him out of Meta. "Meta also became LLM-pilled with sort of recent reshuffling. And it's fine, a strategic decision that maybe makes sense for them. It's just not what I'm interested in." For Yann LeCun, the problem runs deeper than strategy. LLMs are missing something essential about how intelligence actually works: "I cannot imagine that we can build agentic systems without those systems having an ability to predict in advance what the consequences of their actions are going to be. The way we act in the world is that we can predict the consequences of our actions and that's what allows us to plan." His broader critique is that the industry has mistaken fluency for intelligence. Language turned out to be the easy part. The hard part is the physical world. It's why we still don't have domestic robots or level-five self-driving cars, even though today's systems can pass the bar exam and write code.

Yann LeCun (AMI Labs Founder): "The AI industry is completely LLM-pilled. Everybody is working on the same thing. They're all digging the same trench." LeCun explains why no lab dares break from the pack: "They are stealing each other's engineers. So they can't afford to do something different because if they start going on a tangent, they're going to fall behind the other guys. And so they're all doing the same thing." This groupthink is exactly what drove him out of Meta. "Meta also became LLM-pilled with sort of recent reshuffling. And it's fine, a strategic decision that maybe makes sense for them. It's just not what I'm interested in." For Yann LeCun, the problem runs deeper than strategy. LLMs are missing something essential about how intelligence actually works: "I cannot imagine that we can build agentic systems without those systems having an ability to predict in advance what the consequences of their actions are going to be. The way we act in the world is that we can predict the consequences of our actions and that's what allows us to plan." His broader critique is that the industry has mistaken fluency for intelligence. Language turned out to be the easy part. The hard part is the physical world. It's why we still don't have domestic robots or level-five self-driving cars, even though today's systems can pass the bar exam and write code.

Big Brain AI

289,147 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

📁 Fei-Fei Li, one of the most influential AI scientists in the world, argues that common sense is not as mysterious as we think. Much of it is already encoded in language, distilled through thousands of years of human communication. When an AI places the sun at the top of a drawing, it does not need deep physics, it is learning shared patterns. In her view, common sense can be learned, and in many ways an AI is not so different from a five year old child.

📁 Fei-Fei Li, one of the most influential AI scientists in the world, argues that common sense is not as mysterious as we think. Much of it is already encoded in language, distilled through thousands of years of human communication. When an AI places the sun at the top of a drawing, it does not need deep physics, it is learning shared patterns. In her view, common sense can be learned, and in many ways an AI is not so different from a five year old child.

Jon Hernandez

20,744 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Joscha Bach says current AI doesn't need to be conscious to execute tasks, but it must simulate reality to understand it LLMs don't just predict words To solve complex problems, they build deep internal models of spatial reasoning and the human theory of mind "that is why AI can talk about reasoning and mental states"

Joscha Bach says current AI doesn't need to be conscious to execute tasks, but it must simulate reality to understand it LLMs don't just predict words To solve complex problems, they build deep internal models of spatial reasoning and the human theory of mind "that is why AI can talk about reasoning and mental states"

Haider.

17,743 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

"You want to know the most insidious and horrific part of these 6 Democrats encouraging the military to disobey the orders of the Commander in Chief is?" "It's that they know exactly what the consequences of doing that are." "They are evil, but they are not stupid." "They know, and they are encouraging it anyway to advance a false narrative." "Mark Kelly is a traitor and these Democrats are evil." Where is the lie though? Seriously.

"You want to know the most insidious and horrific part of these 6 Democrats encouraging the military to disobey the orders of the Commander in Chief is?" "It's that they know exactly what the consequences of doing that are." "They are evil, but they are not stupid." "They know, and they are encouraging it anyway to advance a false narrative." "Mark Kelly is a traitor and these Democrats are evil." Where is the lie though? Seriously.

AmericanPapaBear™

31,169 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

AMI Labs founder Yann LeCun on why LLMs are fooling us the same way AI has for decades: He argues that every generation of AI scientists has made the same mistake: confusing task performance with real intelligence. LeCun's core challenge to the current hype: "We're fooled into thinking those machines are intelligent because they can manipulate language. And we're used to the fact that people who can manipulate language very well are implicitly smart." He's clear that LLMs are useful, but being a useful tool and being intelligent are two very different things. The real insight is the historical pattern he's lived through. Since the 1950s, wave after wave of AI researchers have claimed their breakthrough was the path to human-level intelligence. Marvin Minsky. Herbert Simon. Frank Rosenblatt — who invented the perceptron, the first learning machine, in the 1950s — all predicted machines as smart as humans within a decade. "They were all wrong." LeCun has personally witnessed three of these cycles of hype and disappointment. And his verdict on the current one is blunt: "This generation with LLMs is also wrong. It's just another example of being fooled." The pattern: A new technique emerges → machines get good at specific tasks → we assume general intelligence The question worth asking: are we impressed by these tools because they're intelligent, or because they sound like they are?

AMI Labs founder Yann LeCun on why LLMs are fooling us the same way AI has for decades: He argues that every generation of AI scientists has made the same mistake: confusing task performance with real intelligence. LeCun's core challenge to the current hype: "We're fooled into thinking those machines are intelligent because they can manipulate language. And we're used to the fact that people who can manipulate language very well are implicitly smart." He's clear that LLMs are useful, but being a useful tool and being intelligent are two very different things. The real insight is the historical pattern he's lived through. Since the 1950s, wave after wave of AI researchers have claimed their breakthrough was the path to human-level intelligence. Marvin Minsky. Herbert Simon. Frank Rosenblatt — who invented the perceptron, the first learning machine, in the 1950s — all predicted machines as smart as humans within a decade. "They were all wrong." LeCun has personally witnessed three of these cycles of hype and disappointment. And his verdict on the current one is blunt: "This generation with LLMs is also wrong. It's just another example of being fooled." The pattern: A new technique emerges → machines get good at specific tasks → we assume general intelligence The question worth asking: are we impressed by these tools because they're intelligent, or because they sound like they are?

Big Brain AI

126,706 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten