You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

DeVliegendeHollander comments on Top 9+2 myths about AI risk - Less Wrong Discussion

44 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 29 June 2015 08:41PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (45)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: [deleted] 30 June 2015 02:26:39PM 0 points [-]

Ah... so not one individual personality, but a "city" of of AI's? Well, if I see it not as a "robotic superhuman" but "robotic super-humankind" then it certainly becomes possible - a whole species of more efficient beings could of course outcompete a lower species but I was under the impression running many beings each advanced enough to be sentient (OK Yudkowsky claims intelligence is possible without sentience but how would a non-sentient being conceptualize?) would be prohibitively expensive in hardware. I mean imagine simulating all of us or at least a human city...

Comment author: jacob_cannell 01 July 2015 05:12:32AM 2 points [-]

We can already run neural nets with 1 billion synapses at 1000 hz on a single GPU, or 10 billion synapses at 100 hz (real-time). At current rates of growth (software + hardware), that will be up to 100 billion synapses @100 hz per GPU in just a few years.

At that point, it mainly becomes a software issue, and once AGI's become useful the hardware base is already there to create millions of them, then soon billions.

Comment author: Wes_W 30 June 2015 11:04:37PM *  0 points [-]

If we could build a working AGI that required a billion dollars of hardware for world-changing results, why would Google not throw a billion dollars of hardware at it?