I suspect that in human science, there are these interesting intuitive leaps that scientists often take where they're using their intuition. But I don't think the process is always using the step-by-step system to logic. The algorithm that we use to coordinate around science involves subgraphs that involve passing around extremely high-dimensional tensors. So this puts a constraint on the type of meta-algorithm that science is. Humans can do this with, you know, maybe in some spots there are high-dimensional Tensors involved, but they don't need it for the whole system.
Read the full transcript here.
Does AI pose a near-term existential risk? Why might existential risks from AI manifest sooner rather than later? Can't we just turn off any AI that gets out of control? Exactly how much do we understand about what's going on inside neural networks? What is AutoGPT? How feasible is it to build an AI system that's exactly as intelligent as a human but no smarter? What is the "CoEm" AI safety proposal? What steps can the average person take to help mitigate risks from AI?
Connor Leahy is CEO and co-founder of Conjecture, an AI alignment company focused on making AI systems boundable and corrigible. Connor founded and led EleutherAI, the largest online community dedicated to LLMs, which acted as a gateway for people interested in ML to upskill and learn about alignment. With capabilities increasing at breakneck speed, and our ability to control AI systems lagging far behind, Connor moved on from the volunteer, open-source Eleuther model to a full-time, closed-source model working to solve alignment via Conjecture.
Staff
Music
Affiliates