Conjecture: Cutting-edge AI will come from cutting-edge algorithms/architectures trained towards cutting-edge objectives (incl. unsupervised learning) in cutting-edge environments/datasets. Anything missing one or more of these components will suffer a major competitiveness penalty.
I would modify this conjecture in the following two ways:
1. I would replace “cutting-edge algorithms” with “cutting-edge algorithms and/or algorithms that use a huge amount of computing power”.
2. I would make the conjecture weaker, such that it won’t claim that “Anything missing one or more of these components will suffer a major competitiveness penalty”.
Whoops, (2) came out cryptic, and is incorrect, sorry. The (correct?) idea I was trying to convey is the following:
If ‘the safety scheme’ in plan 1 requires anything at all that ruins competitiveness—for example, some human-in-the-loop process that occurs recurrently during training—then no further assumptions (such as that conjecture) are necessary for the reasoning in the OP, AFAICT.
This idea no longer seems to me to amount to making the conjecture strictly weaker.
Interesting post!
I would modify this conjecture in the following two ways:
1. I would replace “cutting-edge algorithms” with “cutting-edge algorithms and/or algorithms that use a huge amount of computing power”.
2. I would make the conjecture weaker, such that it won’t claim that “Anything missing one or more of these components will suffer a major competitiveness penalty”.
I like the first modification, but not sure about the second. Wouldn’t that basically just destroy the conjecture? What exactly are you proposing?
Whoops, (2) came out cryptic, and is incorrect, sorry. The (correct?) idea I was trying to convey is the following:
If ‘the safety scheme’ in plan 1 requires anything at all that ruins competitiveness—for example, some human-in-the-loop process that occurs recurrently during training—then no further assumptions (such as that conjecture) are necessary for the reasoning in the OP, AFAICT.
This idea no longer seems to me to amount to making the conjecture strictly weaker.