On Thursday, June 20, 2024 at 4:13:25 AM UTC+2 Jason Resch wrote:
On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 6:05 PM Brent Meeker <meeke...@gmail.com> wrote: You can always add some randomness to a computer program. LLM's aren't deterministic now. Human intelligence may very well be memory plus randomness, although I'd bet on the inclusion of some inference algorithms. The randomness doesn't even have to be in the brain. People interact with their environment which provides a lot of effective randomness plus some relevant prompts. Yes, I think there is no great mystery to creativity. It requires only 1. random permutation/combination, and 2. an evaluation function: *how much better is this new thing compared to the previous thing?* This is the driver behind all the innovation in biology produced by natural selection. And this same mechanism is replicated in the technique of "genetic programming <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_programming>." Koza, who invented genetic programming, used it to create his "invention machine <https://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2006-04/john-koza-has-built-invention-machine/>" which has created patent-worthy improvements across multiple domains of technology. I use genetic programming to evolve bots, and in only a few generations, they move from stumbling around at random, to deriving unique, environment-specific strategies to maximize their ability to feed themselves while avoiding obstacles: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InBsqlWQTts&list=PLq_mdJjNRPT11IF4NFyLcIWJ1C0Z3hTAX&index=2 There is no intelligence imparted to the design of the bots. They evolve purely based on random variation of traits of the top performers (as evaluated based on how much they ate during their life). Your addition about randomness is interesting. It’s true that LLMs incorporate some degree of randomness, and human intelligence might also be influenced by randomness and inference algorithms. The interaction with our environment introduces effective randomness contributing to our decision-making processes. The notion that creativity stems from random permutation/combination and an evaluation function resonates with the principles of natural selection and genetic programming. The example of genetic programming evolving bots to optimize their behavior through random variation and evaluation showcases this mechanism effectively. However, we should differentiate between speculation and facts in your statements. While randomness and evaluation are essential components of genetic programming, the assertion that there is "no great mystery to creativity" oversimplifies: what you're bringing up is a kind of creativity, which is constrained by its iterative limitations. A change here, a small new feature there... it's clear that this is creativity on a budget, making only the smallest adaptations necessary for survival instead of yielding radically new designs from the ground up. The kind that is found and most sought after in boundary-breaking science and/or art, even if everybody stands on shoulders: not every PhD has a Newtonian impact on the world. Randomness + evaluation = creativity looks rhetorically simple and clear. However, there are two problems I see: 1. Who/What is Evaluating? Evaluation can be completely deterministic and mechanical, it can be effective on levels like natural selection, or it can result from a subject with intuition, experience, and a refined sense of taste or a more rudimentary one. It can involve a particular psychology, some world or even multiverse-based ontology to embed said subject, and more. The questions raised encompass our entire history and all qualia, if not more. Therefore, evaluation is not as simple or clear as that seemingly factual statement suggests. "Evaluation," as you sketch out rather unclearly, merely hides the problem of subject and reality for a rhetorical mirage of clarity. 2. Oversimplification of Creativity: By all means, build the creativity machine, order the randomness and evaluation in bottles from Amazon, and win every prize from science to the arts by cranking it up to 11. But this oversimplification doesn't capture the full depth of human creativity, which involves more than just random variations and evaluations. It involves cognitive processes we have difficulty describing, emotional influences, and the ability to synthesize disparate ideas into something more original on the novelty spectrum. Ultimately, while LLMs and AI can significantly augment our capabilities, they remain, for now, advanced assistants rather than autonomous intelligences capable of independent breakthroughs. The future may bring further integration and enhancement, but the unique qualities of human intelligence—our ability to synthesize thought, exercise creativity, and approach problems from unstructured perspectives with imperfect information to name just a few aspects —are not yet replicable by anything people have built. I'm sure Quentin, Telmo, and Russell are reading this and shaking their heads. But they have probably been fired and replaced by LLMs much smarter than them. This should provide additional motivation to build that machine though, Jason. They need our support. Then again, the way we/people behave in the world... it's best we don't develop that, IF it is possible in the first place. I'm not saying we won't see fascinating developments. The threshold for me is overwhelming evidence that something can independently formulate and learn to solve problems effectively with a notable degree of originality in unspecified environments on problems it hasn't been trained on. Synthetic data or not. Superintelligence is more like the thing that can spit out 3000 years worth of mathematical/scientific discoveries in a second. The problem with this, presupposing optimistically and irrationally that it is possible, is that I'm not sure we would understand it. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/47ee8570-3695-474e-a82d-fec212814282n%40googlegroups.com.
