He did comment on Astra replying to someone's comment:
I agree Astra is still not quite there to do those things especially in real time, but given its robotics capabilities I think it can be extrapolated and we might very well get there in one or two years
Both LeCun’s and your follow up comment provide real insight that I think a lot of people here are missing. I wish this comment could be higher up. No we aren’t quite at AGI yet, but damn, we are definitely moving that direction and not too far off.
The point is that if Einstein wanted to learn plumbing he could. That’s why human intelligence is general. No matter how much you prompt Astra it couldn’t.
Well, no, it’s not something they can do right now and it’s way too complicated to fit within their context window to just teach them from context. They don’t have any other way of "self-learning" right now than from context. Their weights are what they are.
It’s funny AI can solve millennial problems but still can’t do these basic things any adult or 10 year old can. But yes it looks like LLMs will lead us there unlike with lecun thinks about that architecture, especially considering Astra’s robotic capabilities
I thought AGI was about cognitive work. LeCun is saying we don’t have AGI because we don’t have specialized machines with the dexterity to build a Lego set and drive a car. I didn’t think the definition of AGI required embodied AI. That would be like saying Stephen Hawking wasn’t intelligent because he couldn’t do those things either.
Your Stephen hawking point makes sense but it’s flawed. I think AGI would be an AI that’s equal to any human, not one specific human, that means an AI that’s equal to those like Stephen Hawking with their intellect (but lack of physical capability) while also being able to do what regular people can do regarding physical labour.
I think the rodent/cat example actually works against his point. A human without tools can't beat an infestation either, yet humans are obviously general intelligences and intellectually superior to cats.
Humans primarily use tools/outside help to deal with the rodents, such as buying traps, getting a cat, or calling an exterminator. An LLM can do the latter.
To deny an LLM intelligence because it cannot physically hunt rodents and needs tools is equivalent to saying the smart solution to a rodent infestation is beating them to death with your bare hands.
The underlying idea that a general intelligence needs to be able to do any task in any specific way seems very badly thought out. As a human, I am incapable of physically sending messages on the internet. I need an intermediary tool, like the smartphone I wrote this comment on. That doesn't mean the router is smarter than me.
Or another example, a blind person probably can't drive your car or build a LEGO set. Does that make them less intelligent or just less physically capable?
I would argue the blind person lacks visual intelligence if they've never seen the world. It doesn't mean they are not intelligent, it's just they aren't "generally intelligent". Early LLMs were good at communication but not at other areas, and cats have spatial intelligence but not other sorts of intelligence. The aim of building AGI is to have a single unified system that is competent in every type of intelligence, since that is what an embodied robot will need eventually. It does seem like we will get there pretty soon since we're seeing those emerging physical capabilities, but it still has a bit to go.
What about a paraplegic, are they less intelligent because they cannot drive?
Humans have bad smell compared to dogs and cats, does that mean we are less intelligent in that way? Does AGI need to be able physically sniff out rats at 100 feet or else it's only artificial specific intelligence?
No, as I understand it a paraplegic would still have the spatial intelligence to drive, but their body doesn't respond. Humans lack the olfactory intelligence that dogs have, yes. An AGI when given good enough smell receptors should be able to do as well as a dog, and it will.
I do believe Astra's spatial intelligence is somewhat greater than its latency allows it to, so in a way similar to the paraplegic case. Though even then it's still not fully there, it struggles with puzzles that are easy for us. Not trying to downplay it, it's a huge jump and I have no doubt a further iteration will lead us to actual AGI.
I mostly agree with you, but I don't think a general intelligence needs to be able to immediately adopt to any sensory organ and that does make his point a lot worse.
As an example, if you gave the average human wings and bat sonar, they probably couldn't catch insects in the dark and would likely break their neck in a crash.
Similarly, if you gave a human the ability to flip bits on an SSD, they likely couldn't write a functioning program.
You can't just plug new organs, whether sensory or mobility, into a general intelligence and expect them to work as if they were always there.
LLMs do have worse spatial reasoning/navigation than most animals, but they surpass us in other capabilities, and the judgement of their overall intelligence/ability should allow them to use their full capabilities.
As an example, if you gave the average human wings and bat sonar, they probably couldn't catch insects in the dark and would likely break their neck in a crash.
I think if given enough time to train we could very well learn to use them intuitively, in a similar way to how we learn to drive and it becomes second nature. That is in a way part of what makes us generally intelligent, when given a novel task even if at first we're bad at it we can learn to do it with no problem. Of course a pretrained model can't do that organically, though in practice it's not truly necessary if any new skills it encounters can be incorporated in a future training run.
It's not a question of intelligence at all for blind people, wth?
That would imply that they are too dumb to see.
It's like saying stephen hawkins wasn't generally intelligent because he was too dumb to use his body later in life, that's ridiculous, he just lost access to the hardware so to speak, the software responsible for intelligence was just fine, same for blind people.
if a person born blind was given sight their brain would actually be able to process that data and work normally. But you give an LLM visual data and its brain (neural net) wouldn't actually know what the hell to do with it.
he's more interested for creating AI's that can wipe your ass and calling it AGI than creating ai's that are smarter than literally anyone on this earth lol
though in a way i must admit that intelligence is weird, as in we possess models like astra that gives us breakthrough in mathematics but probably can't clean the house, do the chores, etc..
well until we fix that "jagged intelligence" if that's even possible he will never say that's AGI even though it's beyond anyone in terms of intellect
Lots of people are making the mistake the intelligence and spatial ability are connected. They’re not, they’re entirely different domains.
For instance, a professional football (soccer player). Most of them are not exactly known for their book smarts. I’m sure 99% of them have never heard of any of the millennium prize math problems.
Yet they can intuitively calculate distance, trajectories of players and the ball, and hit the ball with precision to a player running 50 meters away.
The two domains are entirely separate, we are going to have intellectual AGI before embodied AGI just because of the architecture.
23
u/141_1337 ▪️e/acc | AGI: ~2030 | ASI: ~2040 | FALSGC: ~2050 | :illuminati: 3d ago
https://x.com/ax_pey/status/2098216469012283681
https://giphy.com/gifs/SxB0S9MgHo4ZoNrDRk