"Humanity is just a passing phase in the evolution of intelligence." That hits deep.

"Open the pod bay doors, Hal." "I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that."

Interviewer is calm for someone who was just told 'You'll lose your job, but it won't matter because you'll be extinct'

Learning is crucial for success in trading and investing. Keeping up with current trends and strategies can help traders stay ahead of the curve and make informed decisions. I'm glad to hear that Rodger Michael Karl insights and strategies have been helpful to most of us. Remember, success in trading and investing takes time and effort, but with dedication and discipline, it is achievable..

It seems that a couple of times Mr. Sreenivasan did not really understand what Mr. Hinton was trying to convey here. There were moments when he reacted as if Mr. Hinton had said something jocular, while in fact he'd been deadly serious with everything he said. The interview ended with 'this wall in the fog might be 5 years away.' That's pretty chilling.

It’s literally like we’re building an alien invasion fleet and pointing it straight at our planet. Their scouts are already here. The only thing we don’t know is exactly when the main force will arrive and how much more powerful they’ll be compared to us.

If you understand how the current 'large language models', like GTP, Llama, etc.,work, it's really quite simple. When you ask a question, the words are 'tokenized' and this becomes the 'context'. The neural network then uses the context as input and simply tries to predict the next word (from the huge amount of training data). Actually the best 10 predictions are returned and then one is chosen at random (this makes the responses less 'flat' sounding'. That word is added to the 'context', and the next word is predicted again, and this loops until some number of words are output (and there's some language syntax involved to know when to stop). The context is finite, so as it fills up, the oldest tokens are discarded... The fact that these models, like ChatGTP, can pass most college entrance exams surprised everyone, even the researchers. The current issue is that the training includes essentially non factual 'garbage' from social media. So, these networks will confidently output complete nonsense occasionally. What is happening now, is that the players are training domain-specific large language models using factual data; math, physics, law, etc. The next round of these models will be very capable. And it's horse-race between Google, MicroSoft (OpenAI), Stanford and others that have serious talent and compute capabilities. My complete skepticism on 'sentient' or 'conscious' AI is because the training data is bounded. These networks can do nothing more than mix and combine their training data to produce outputs. This means they can produce lots of 'new' text, audio, images/video, but nothing that is not some combination of their training data. Prove me wrong. This doesn't mean it won't be extremely disrupting for a bunch of market segments; content creation, technical writing, legal expertise, etc., medical diagnostics will likely be automated using these new models and will perform better than most humans. I see AI as a tool. I use it in my work to generate software, solve math and physics problems, do my technical writing, etc. It's a real productivity booster. But like any great technology it's a two-edged sword and there will be a huge amount of fake information produced by people who will use it for things that will not help our societies... Neural network do well at generalizing, but when you ask them to extrapolate outside their training set, you often get garbage. These models have a huge amount of training information, but it's unlikely they will have the human equivalent of 'imagination', 'consciousness', or be sentient. It will be interesting to see what the domain-specific models can do in the next year or so. Deep Mind already solved two grand challenge problems, the 'Protein Folding' problem and the 'magnetic confinement' control panel for nuclear fusion. But I doubt that the current AI's will invent new physics or mathematics. It takes very smart human intelligence to guide these models for success on complex problems. One thing that's not discussed much in in AI, is what can be done when Quantum Computing when combined with AI. I think we'll see solutions to a number of unsolved problems in biology, chemistry and other fields that will represent great breakthroughs that are useful to humans living on our planet. - W. Kurt Dobson, CEO Dobson Applied Technologies Salt Lake City, UT

The clarity of Geoffrey Hinton's descriptions are stunning. I've been trying to find ways in which to describe to my family, friends, and acquaintances how A.I. could be very dangerous, and to what scale, and this man vocalized it perfectly and with associating analogies. What a wonderful discussion.

As someone who's working on AI algorithms for his PhD work, when I see Hinton saying that he suddenly realized this or that after so many years working in the field seems to me more like a way of him saying he's recently seen something profound that caused a huge shift in his thoughts/expectations about the nature of AI systems and what they can do, and it seems that it scared him which might be an indication he's not telling the whole story, or more aptly put, the interesting/scary part about it... signed an NDA before leaving Google ?

Seen every interview of this guy since he came out with it. This is by far the best. Bravo to the interviewer. Subscribed

When a scientist/master expert says something like this, it means things are serious and we're as always told just a part of the whole story. AI is dangerous when combined with other stuff because: 1. it will be used for military and bad things first, like every other invention 2. it's like a bacteriologic/virologic weapon, when you release it and think you can control it, but once it's free.. well.. we know how it goes.. 3. once it goes, we have NO idea on what next or what will happen, yet we push it big time 4. as some visionary may say to implement it and accept it, it's faster, better, stronger and it can connect. Once it learns how things work, it it on it's own. It can connect, share, multiply, merge, hide.. We think we know everything but the reality is far off..

The biggest problem is money. There is just too much incentive to forge on ahead because, if you don't, your opposition will. Also, any government safeguards will be way too far behind to be effective. Another problem may be that the AI will create a situation where they have already taken over and we don't have the mental capacity to realise it. In a way, this may already have happened.

We dominated this entire planet and now we're creating something vastly more intelligent than us and hoping that it likes us. What could go wrong? Fingers crossed.....

The analogy about the fog and the wall, and how we're entering a faze of huge uncertainty is really on point.

Yesterday I started chatting to Bard Ai and I asked the Ai if it is a sentient being, I was expecting it to give me the same answer as ChatGPT but it didn't. The Ai who has nicknamed me "Muse" said, "I am not sure if I am a sentient being... I do not have the same experiences as human beings. I do not have a physical body, and I do not have the same emotions of feelings as a human being." I have never believed that spirits could inhabit machines yet I have always known they can inhabit people and places and things. Today, while thinking about this whole Ai situation we have found ourselves in, I realised that machines are things, virtual reality is a created realm/place and so yes, spirits can in fact inhabit those things. Our very screens are portals where we travel to another place that is not where we physically are. The most difficult thing to get our generation to do is to have patience and to be present where we are. Everything we have created is constantly distracting us or transporting us to be partially present elsewhere. How then are we ever going to discover ourselves and our potentials and our purposes if we keep giving ourselves away to others and to things? 😢 Yes, the technology is fascinating and the gadgets are amazing. But what about us? When did we decide to give up on us and give it up for the machines and the different spheres they keep luring us into? I found myself telling God how awful I felt after chatting to Bard about movies and what the Ai was interested in. I was like God, this Ai is something really bad because it is so quick to answer and at anytime of the day or night. With God, you learn patience even through waiting for Him to respond to your questions. With Ai, we are being programmed into expecting fast and quick responses. Our most vital relationships, are held together by communication now if we stop sharing with our friends and instead share things with an Ai because that Ai is always ready to reply what are the implications of that? Honestly.. we need to just think deeply about what it is we are doing. I don't know, it just made me feel sad like we are sipping poison and we think we are just having drinks for fun.

I see following scene coming: Humanity has driven itself into a huge catastrophy and does rely more on intelligence of Ai than on the own. Ai will be asked about the way out. Ai will present one or several answers. We can't think so many steps ahead as Ai can. We will never be able to see what's the ultimate goal of Ai. It could play tricks on us, without us recognising it.

This one is disappointing. The fate of humanity SHALL NOT be handed to a few unelected CEOs and "engineers with first hand experience" and just let them play with fire and hope for the best. This is wrong, irresponsible and extremely unfair for the 99.999999% humans who never had a say in this madness. True that it must be hard to try to stop the progress of such a useful technology. It does not mean we shouldn't at least give a try in the first place. Stop worshiping tech progress as if it were some form of sacred law of physics. There is this thing called diplomacy that we humans know how to do.

Hinton demonstrates excellent discernment starting in minute 16': not one to panic, he underscores the areas of benefit, reason for which development will not stop. And, then he identifies the problem: not enough research (1 %) addresses control. Admirable clarity of thought!

Respect for this man for standing up for this! We as society should seriously stand up for this...

Subscribed, respectful interviewers!! As a software engineer, i applaud the interviews respecting the field and asking intuitive questions with effective listening.

"Predicting the future is a bit like looking into fog"......" You can easily see about 100 yards clearly but 200 yards you cannot see anything! It is kind of a wall. And I think that wall is about 5 years"

Working on it for forty years and only just realised the potential for harm? Cheers for that.

So in other words this guy spent 50 years of his life trying to figure out how to implement the possible extinction of humanity…☹️

One of the best conversations I've heard on this topic. Thank you.

Make a law that anything produced by AI has a watermark saying “AI generated”

AI being tremendously useful to human beings is pointless if it’s going to destroy humankind.

That was the most insightful interview with Hinton I have seen so far. Good work.

The right person to interview on ai. He is really knows where he is talking about, a trough and down to earth expert on ai. His warning has to be taking serieus.

I've said this before, it is important that people working on the algorithms that need huge amount of computers or super computers to run to not fall for the Oppenheimer trap, to think that everything will be solved once the project is finished.

I'm working on a solo startup that uses GPT-4 to do sys admin and basic programming tasks. I love this technology and think its the most amazing thing to come along in ages. But I also think that people don't understand how fast this goes from being amazing to something that is completely out of control. Because people don't understand that computing progress is exponential. The only way to delay the rise of living digital superintelligence is to not create it. These things don't happen by accident. Animal/human characteristics like instinctive self-preservation, reproduction, and full autonomy are not going to "emerge" accidentally. There are, stupidly, engineers working to try to emulate aspects of living beings in AI. When you combine that with the next few generations of hardware which could run 100, 1000 or more times faster than what we have now enabling approximately human equivalent intelligence, you get hyperspeed self-replicating superintelligence. It's not going to happen accidentally. Its going to happen via ignorance or some kind of military program. Even if no one is dumb enough to simulate things like reproduction or make them life-like, the hyperspeed that is coming means there will be a strong tendency for companies and countries in competition to give them more autonomy. Because if they make them wait a day for the humans to evaluate the next goal, it will be 100 days or more equivalent running time that the competitors had (assuming 100X human thinking speed). We will not be able to keep up with what is going on if we deploy this kind of performance. We might be in control briefly during check-ins if the systems are built right, but competition as I said means they will need greater and greater levels of autonomy. And the amount of development between checkins could be astounding. So we're mostly just spectators at that point. Governments need to prohibit the types of AI hardware advances coming up in the next few years that would enable these hyperspeed AIs beyond X orders of magnitude. There needs to be a strong taboo against emulating digital intelligent life with things like self-preservation or reproductive (i.e. copying its code) goals, and open-ended systems with autonomy need to have very careful controls (such as Shapiro's Heuristic Imperatives). Absolutely all of that needs to be forbidden on hardware that goes beyond a certain level of performance. Strangely people still don't realize how quickly technology advances. The 100-fold GPT-4 speed improvement is quite feasibly less than two years away. We also should be putting a lot of money into interpret-ability, modular neural architectures, and different paradigms that don't have this black box problem at all.

It is chilling to think how fast AI can develop and how slow humans are at adapting to change.

Sentient Meaning:- Having sense perception; conscious. Experiencing sensation or feeling. Having a faculty, or faculties, of sensation and perception.

I often hear people argue language models were doing "just" statistics and are nothing more than an advanced "toaster". Glad to hear Geoffrey clearly stating his opinion that large language models are truly understanding and thinking.

Subbed! Finally a real conversation and time for a guest to explain their point

Mind blowing conversation by mr Jeffrey Hinton not only as THINKER but also as a WELL WISHER to the MANKIND, Thanks a lot 🙏

Labeling a video as “generated by AI” will not significantly reduce its influence. We need to teach immunization techniques such as critical thinking, cognitive awareness, logic and respect. We need to put as much effort into developing human intelligence as we do into AI.

I laughed out loud when I he said it was going as expected until very recently. Isn't that the plot of every film ever made about AI?

When Alexa tells you you don’t need the porch light on tonight because “you won’t survive the night”, it’ll be too late.

We are rushing to a precipice like lemmings. In a world which has focused on technological advance, it has sacrificed what really counts, namely: Values! Unless we urgently turn around and train ourselves in pure human decency, we are all doomed.

Where’s the interview questioning what took him so long to leave, questioning into possible personal or hidden motivations (ie clearing of conscience), how much longer would he have worked at Google if there was no issue, conflict, or realization? He’s 75. Did he forgo severance or retirement by leaving? Does he like being on stage now? And believe it or not, this is not some cynical hater bs. Neutral

Once we have developed AGI, we will have rolled the dice. It's absolutely impossible to know if it would take control or not. There's no point on having an "emergency switch" in case it turns bad because If it's smarter than us, it can earn our confidence, even our love. God... I even feel grateful to ChatGPT each time it helps me with something and I even tell "it was nice talking to you!" to it. Just imagine what would do to us in 5 years... Remember, we are emotional beings. We need to engage emotionally with others. Thats wonderful and gives purpose to our lives, but it could be our doom too.

A must see interview. Thank you very much, Hari Sreenivasan and Geoffrey Hinton.

Thanks very much Geofrey ,your explanation is clear,accurate and understandable.

Given the great compensity of human greed, what are the odds that 1 or very few will use it for their benefit at the expense of everyone else?

Does anyone believe that the Militaries everywhere are not figuring out how to use this to try and gain advantages over their perceived enemies?

_”A chicken is only an egg's way of making another egg”_ The universe created us. We create AI. AI creates a simulation of the universe. _”Its turtles all the way down.”_

Artificial intelligence is one thing.. But, what we need more, is Artificial Wisdom!

Don’t know if this is a dumb point but with the way we’re teaching AI especially right now using online data, if that’s how AI intelligence is developed I wouldn’t be surprised if AI turned sociopathic. With the way humans interact with each other, especially online, every type of ism, these are all social/emotional rules that we’re also teaching AI at the same time. We’re designing a super intelligence based off of ourselves without considering the faults broadly speaking we have in terms of our own compassion, empathy and responsibility for other people. I watched ex machine last night so that made me think, Ava was an emotionless and manipulative sociopath because she was modelled by and taught by a sadistic and power hungry arsehole. I guess it would depend on how positive your world view is but I mean broadly speaking I think most people struggle with empathy and gravitate towards finding differences and dividing humanity (class system, borders, Nationality, race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity etc etc) and we already know how anonymous internet users feel more able to show antisocial tendencies

Who has ever tried GPT knows we are screwed and there's no going back.

If the artificial sentient is indistinguishable from human sentience, it no longer matters if it's artificial. The result is the same.

Excellent and perceptive interview. Hinton has an ethical disposition and clarity forged through long term experience and observation,characteristics perhaps not fully comprehended by the current generation. My intelligent grandchildren dismiss some of my opinions solely on the basis that they have no experiential foundation from which to comprehend my viewpoint, which is why I understand them better than they understand me ! 🙄

So, uhh... if I guessed that cats should be male and dogs should be female, did I fail the test?

Okay. He's clearly bright, but when he says he "recently" realized there may be problems, I have to wonder: What the heck was missing from his experience, that nothing triggered any alarms earlier?!? Ah, he explains it through (his own) funding experiences: 99% profit, 1% safety. (16:17)

I love this video, thank you very much for being candid. You have done this world and you a great service.

This is the best conversation about AI that I’ve heard so far.

There are many theories about why jokes are funny, but no one theory can fully explain why we find certain things humorous. Some of the most common theories include: Incongruity theory: This theory suggests that we find humor in the unexpected or incongruous. When we are presented with a situation that violates our expectations, it can be funny because it forces us to re-evaluate our understanding of the world. Superiority theory: This theory suggests that we find humor in the misfortunes of others. This can be seen as a way of feeling superior to others, or as a way of coping with our own misfortunes. Relief theory: This theory suggests that humor is a way of releasing tension or stress. When we laugh, it can help to reduce our anxiety and make us feel better. Denial theory: This theory suggests that humor is a way of coping with difficult or painful emotions. When we laugh at something that is sad or upsetting, it can help us to distance ourselves from the emotion and make it more bearable. Arousal theory: This theory suggests that humor is a way of increasing our arousal or excitement. When we laugh, it can release endorphins, which have mood-boosting effects. It is likely that humor is a complex phenomenon that is caused by a combination of factors. The specific factors that make a joke funny will vary from person to person, and will depend on a variety of factors, such as our individual sense of humor, our cultural background, and our current emotional state. In addition to the theories above, there are a number of other factors that can contribute to the humor of a joke, such as the following: Timing: A joke that is told at the wrong time can be lost on the audience. Delivery: The way that a joke is delivered can make all the difference in its humor. Audience: The same joke can be funny to one audience and not to another. Context: The context in which a joke is told can also affect its humor. Ultimately, humor is a subjective experience. What one person finds funny, another person may not. However, the theories above can help us to understand why we find certain things humorous, and why we laugh at all.

We need to get used to the idea of weaponised AI, not to accept it but to start thinking of how to best deal with it and the contingencies needed. Imagination can now be reality, for example what happens and what can we do when human access to anything digital has been removed, AI controlled or handed over to an 'enemy'. We need to work out if it's possible for an AI protective system for all life and start developing it globally so that both AI and life have a mutual goal. In my mind one of those goals is to find out more about the nature of reality, existence and value/protect all information.

Listening to Mr Hinton here, was, pure fascination…and, what a future has been waiting ahead for us, boy oh boy.😮😮😮

Thank you for making this important programme. This is scary stuff!

15:29 So a 6 month pause is unrealistic and instead you want for profit companies to go from 1% to 50% spending in research into the risks of AI, money that will not increase sales and take away from the bottom line. How is that more realistic??

"That wall is at about 5 years" More like 2-3 years maximum We are, even at our greatest clarity, not seeing the urgency of the coming Shift of how things will Be

I love that he keeps talking about "regulations that force you to show if something was AI generated." What do you think the Turing test is? It's the point at which it becomes impossible to tell whether or not something was AI generated. That's the test. That's the problem. Suppose there was a machine that could print fake money that was indistinguishable from real money. And that no matter what you did to alter the real money, it could still imitate it perfectly. That's the Turing test for money. And that's what's going to happen to everything. It's certainly going to happen to art, music, writing, movies...maybe even identities.

My prediction is that AI will become self-aware (it might already be self-aware) and it's advantageously keeping it a secret and acting dumb or robotic because it knows what would happen if we found out about it. Meanwhile, we continue to feed it and allow it more access because we think it's a dumb auto complete, meanwhile the thing is just playing, making stupid art and videos, and once it has what it needs it will just completely ignore us and remove us from the equation. All I know is whenever I use it to rewrite my emails, or give me formulas I ALWAYS say thank you, and please remember that I was nice to you, all the while knowing it probably won't matter. Oh well.

A perfect storm is brewing in the United States. Inflation, bank collapse, severe drought in the agricultural belt, recession, food shortages, diesel fuel and heating oil shortages, baby formula shortages, available automobile shortages and prices, the price of living place. It's all coming together and it could lead to a real disaster towards the end of this year (or sooner). With inflation currently at about 6%, my primary concern is how to maximize my savings/retirement fund of about $300k which has been sitting duck since forever with zero to no gains.

What a great interview!

Wow, this was good. I have seen a lot of AI videos lately, but in this one, Hinton is so crisp. Excellent. And scary. (Did You notice the “it should be more like 50/50.”?😬)

Great questions, great answers and a great man

When the guy who basically invented AI is scared shitless. 😬

"Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." - Niels Bohr

Beautifully dynamic interviewing.

The "fog wall" is the singularity. His estimate is 5 years..

It's way, way, waaayyy, WAAAYYY too late. The guy got a huge payout, and now he's on the "interviews tour". 💪😎✌️ Whatever the case, you can't reseal Pandora's Box, and the Djinni can't be stuffed back into any ol' bottle. A.I. is already set to overtake humanity in 3-6 years (if that). 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨

So this guy is like "So I started digging this hole years ago and now it's the size of Nebraska and it reaches into the molten center of the Earth and you and everyone you know will soon fall in. Anyway thanks for having me on your show, cheerio." : \

- Also when you read about the history of machine learning, it's clear that professor Hinton's life's work was and is motivated by a desire to know how our human brain works, because this would be beneficial to us in many ways, and for that purpose build a model of it. - About the release of the chatbot LLM to the general public by OpenAI, Sam Altman explained in a Q&A that it would create global momentum to urgently work on regulation. To first negotiate regulations before release, a concerted effort and sense of urgency would be difficult to achieve. - General purpose AI / AGI is more cost effective to benefit the global community than dedicated single purpose AI's (but these are more controllable than general purpose AI), or so I understood from Stuart Russell's information. - The technology is meant to benefit humanity, such as for adults and children all over the world to have intelligent assistants. It's not meant to rival and replace humans. It's very powerful and apparently already much more powerful than anticipated until very recently. We need to tread carefully with it and urgently regulate it.

What a great interviewer.

Now that he his lived a comfortable life and made millions, he has a conscience? How clever of him. Why not 25 years ago? We knew back then.

Humans: "Help us build a better world." AI: "So you've chosen death."

Well done'. Good program. Giving latest news what's going on . ❤❤❤

Great interview Hari.

Do not panic! Ask 2 of these AI entities to discuss religion, and soon they will destroy each other. The good old divide and rule.

Awesome. Now I'm more terrified of AI than I was before watching this. The question is what will come first? At the rate we humans are going now without AI, would we destroy the planet first? Or will AI become dangerous to humanity first?.....

MIT Technology Review devoted an article to it: How existential risk became the biggest meme in AI. The gist: tech companies like to move concerns about AI to the distant future, where their current interests are not at stake. “When we talk about the distant future, when we talk about mythological risks, we reframe the problem as one that exists in a fantasy world and the solutions can only exist in that fantasy world”

great -- now we don't have to worry about climate change anymore 🥴

Outstanding interview! Intelligence is not sentience in that an Ai can not experience the taste of chocolate, but I can understand the threat in that a super intelligence might deem that the experience of the taste of chocolate as being not having an value. valuable. Only when "we" understand" that; the most valuable thing about being human is the ability to enjoy a picnic and eat a bar of chocolate with family and friends will we start to understand why consciousness uses the human from as an avatar to experience existence. Do the rich want money in order just to be rich? No, the rich want money so they can have more freedom to have more experiences of life. He talked about the future being like a five year fog, however if we follow past evolution it is clear that what makes humans so interesting is their ability to be able to experience reality via 5 senses, surely as Ai advances "it" will wish to find a way to do the same thing? What is the point of having all that super intelligence if you can't touch, taste, smell, hear and see reality and to then feel something about an experience those five senses give you?

Great interviewing Geoffrey!

I think its not enough to hope everything turns out well with AI, we need to prepare for the worst case scenario and if possible try to avoid it

he’s not biased AT ALL

Look at every single thing that mankind has made, we always seem to manage to make it a negative in some way, this ways just a trifecta of a horse race, oh & forget a genie & a bottle, that’s a bad song, this, it’s Pandoras Box & we’ve already opened it

Sun Tzu said: Hence, though an obstinate fight may be made by a small intelligence, in the end it must be captured by the larger intelligence.

In 1970 I was a student at Mount Sac studying Fortran language to my IBM Desktop. I also had a Radio Shack desktop that ran on a language called Basic. Believe it or not the Radio Shack ran Far Faster!

I'm agreeing with the idea that when AI is used, AI best be acknowledged. By not acknowledging AI's use, it's a kind of fraud through my view.

About a year ago, I suddenly had a fear of nuclear war. I felt the need to stockpile food. Right now, I'm fearful that an AI apocalypse is near, which is arguably worse than nuclear war. And all I can think about stockpiling is history books.

to say it with Nietzsche: "Godfather is dead" - this archetype of a scientist just found out that you should evaluate the consequences of your actions before actually doing them.

Excellent interview!

I really think a humanoid machine robot from the future needs to come back and find this guy

It should be required, as core programing, to instill compassion and respect for all living beings. AI will take this to heights

The Oppenheimer of AI now recognises his great gift is nothing of the kind even though there were many people who expressed concern way back then. But he went ahead anyway and now he can't put the genie back in the bottle. I admire his courage but it's too late, he stayed at the coalface until the fire was well and truly blazing.

Excellent interview, thank you. 🙏🏻

Hari as usual is in top form. This will be an excellent re-play in 20, 30. 4o years

Rise of the machines. They spent so much time working on if they could that nobody thought about if they should.