Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Will the development and deployment of the first AGI be controlled by a select few major militaries and big tech companies? CEO Dr. Ben Goertzel discusses growing public concerns about AGI governance and how people are beginning to ask the right questions about the AI's future.

18,813 görüntüleme • 11 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

As Big Tech companies continue channeling billions of research dollars and attention into developing and scaling LLMs, a fundamental question is emerging in tech circles: Are LLMs actually leading us away from true AGI? At a #Consensus2025 panel addressing whether Web3 is losing the AI race, our CEO, Dr. Ben Goertzel, challenged the conventional wisdom driving investment strategies at many leading AI companies and sovereign wealth funds, including the recent multi-billion-dollar investments from Saudi Arabia and the UAE in US AI infrastructure. "I would quote Yan LeCun, a pioneer of deep learning and the head of AI at Facebook, who said on the highway to AGI, LLMs are an off-ramp," Dr. Goertzel told attendees, rejecting the premise that Web3 approaches are falling behind centralized AI development: "If you've gotten off the off-ramp, it doesn't matter if you're going 1,000 miles an hour and the other guy's only going 300 miles an hour if they're going on the right highway to the destination." The panel, which featured Ben Fielding (Founder, Gensyn), Jesus Rodriguez (CEO, IntoTheBlock), Clara Tsao (Founding Officer, Filecoin Foundation), and Jeff Wilser (Founder and Host, The People's AI Podcast), revealed a stark divide in how industry experts view the future of decentralized AI. While other panelists pointed to Web3's current disadvantages in talent, datasets, and infrastructure, Dr. Goertzel addressed a deeper issue: the incremental improvement of LLMs is not a viable approach to achieving human-level AGI. However, "If scaling up transformer neural nets is the crux of how you get to AGI, it's hard to see how the US and Chinese governments and the Big Tech companies in their orbit don't win the race," Dr. Goertzel acknowledged, noting the immense capital these entities are deploying. Our AGI R&D efforts at SingularityNET suggest a different path forward. "My own research intuition is that LLMs are not suited to be the central hub of a human-level AGI, let alone a Superintelligence, although they can be a powerful ingredient in a hybrid architecture for AGI," Dr. Goertzel explained. Our team is developing OpenCog Hyperon, a "hybrid, deep neural net, symbolic reasoning, evolutionary learning, approach to AGI within more sophisticated cognitive architectures than LLMs comprise," as described by Dr. Goertzel. This cognition-level approach represents a fundamentally different direction from most mainstream AI development. Dr. Goertzel closed with a prediction that would have seemed outlandish just a few years ago but now reflects our growing confidence in decentralized approaches through which AGI will be in the hands of humanity at large and without a single owner or controller: "Within the Artificial Superintelligence Alliance, we will launch the first AGI within one to three years from now on a decentralized infrastructure, and Big Tech will play catchup."

SingularityNET

39,110 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

THE TEN RECKONINGS OF AGI are ten critical, unanswered questions that will shape the future of humanity and our relationship with artificial intelligence, from narrow AI through human-level Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) to Superintelligence. This initiative builds on our new global study, which revealed in its first phase mounting public concern over AI governance. Initial findings from US-based respondents indicate that 48% believe advanced AI systems are being developed primarily by and for the benefit of a select few Big Tech corporations and governments, with insufficient public oversight and accountability. The data also shows that two-in-five (39%) Americans are worried that current AI development is not transparent and accountable to the public. The majority (54%) say they feel the direction of development is already out of our hands, and they lack control over the role AI will play in their lives over the next 5-10 years. CEO Dr. Ben Goertzel challenges this trajectory, advocating for open dialogue and interoperability among all AI actors to ensure that future developments serve humanity and other sentient beings. Starting next week, each of THE TEN RECKONINGS will be interrogated by Dr. Goertzel together with the world’s leading minds in AI, technology, philosophy, and ethics, with publicly available information for all to engage with the discussion. Follow THE TEN RECKONINGS on YouTube and subscribe to stay updated as each question is explored:

SingularityNET

28,020 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

AGI risk seems lower than it is because the people who know that AGI risk exists are almost all incentivized against talking about it openly. I just made a YouTube video about this that (I think) explains why. Broadly, there are two groups of people not talking about AGI risk: -- People who know AGI risk is real (i.e. AGI lab leaders) -- People who know nothing about AGI risk (i.e. politicians, citizens) To catalyze wide scale discourse about AGI risk, I argue that the following two strategies are strong candidates: 1. [Bottom-Up] Get Citizens Concerned: Find ways to meld AGI risk narratives into legacy media and more understandable political talking points which are already in the Overton window. This work is bound to be messy, and to ultimately soil the core of the message with left-right political gunk, but (barring an AI disaster) its likely the only way that AGI risk catches on with enough of a core base of citizens. As I explain in the video essay, the citizens are the lynchpin to getting everyone (those who don’t know, and those who know) to discuss AGI risk more frankly. 2. [Top-Down] Get a Losing AGI Lab Leader to “Flip”: Those closest to achieving AGI are not going to flip and start talking about AGI risk, the rewards are too great. But those who are losing the race (and don’t want to live to see their rivals achieve the final flex before them) might be able to feign virtue by claiming “Now I see AGI is dangerous, I’m a concerned expert and this needs to be regulated!” They can cloak themselves in pretended virtue while also preventing a rival from crossing the finish line first. I argue that hoping for more Jeff Hintons and Daniel Kokotajlo-like people isn't a good strategy when the incentives are still structured to keep most of them from wanting to talk about it. Here’s the full video essay:

Daniel Faggella

26,975 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce