Ask me anything!
www.understandingai.org
Discover more from Understanding AI
Exploring how AI works and how it's changing our world.
Over 19,000 subscribers
Continue reading
Ask me anything!
I'll answer reader questions in a post next week.
A little over two months after launch, Understanding AI has more than 5,000 readers. With all these new readers, I’d love to get a better understanding of who is reading the newsletter and what you’d like me to write about. So I’d like to ask a favor: ask me a question!
If you are reading this as an email, click the title at the top of the email to go to the Substack website. Then scroll down to leave a comment at the bottom of the post. I’ll answer a few of your questions in a post next week.
Thanks for being part of Understanding AI!
Ask me anything!
Here's what I don't understand about the current AI discourse: training-set/feedback/reinforcement learning has proved dominant over rule-based AI. Yet, when it comes to assuming AIs will be "super-intelligent" *in the real world* (not chess, Go, protein-folding), I haven't heard any of the dystopians explain what feedback mechanism even has the possibility of creating a threatening AI. Instead, to my lay ears, it sounds like "we'll, computers are logical and fast, ergo they must be capable of super-intelligence"--but that completely skirts the issue and seems to rely more on rule-based thinking. Have you heard folks discuss feedback mechanisms for super-intelligence? And might those discussions help clarify how to built AIs safely?
How will LLMs ever get over the hallucination problem? Or will they? Is there a solution that doesn't involve lots and lots of human-executed hard coding?