Who’s in the loop? How humans create AI that then creates itself

If you think about the approximate lifecycle of AI that’s being built today, it goes something like this:

1. Write algorithms (eg, neural nets)
2. Scrape data (eg, text and images)
3. Train (1) algorithms on (2) scraped data to create models (eg, GPT-4, Stable Diffusion)
4. Use human feedback (eg, RLHF) to fine tune (3) models – including addition of explicit rules / handicaps to prevent abuse
5. Build products using those (4) fine tuned models – both end-user products (like MidJourney) and API endpoints (like OpenAI’s API)
6. Let users do things with the (5) products (eg, write essays, suggest code, translate languages). Inputs > Outputs
7. Users and AI owners then evaluate the (6) results against objectives like profitability, usefulness, controllability, etc. Based on these evaluations, steps (1) through (6) are further refined and rebuilt and improved

Each of those steps initially involved humans. Many humans doing many things. Humans wrote the math and code that went into the machine learning algorithms. Humans wrote the scripts and tools that scraped the data. Etc.

And very steadily, very incrementally, very interestingly, humans are automating and removing themselves from each of those steps.

AI agents are one example of this. Self-directed AI agents can take roughly defined goals and execute multi-step action plans, removing humans from steps (6) and (7).

Data scraping is mostly automated (2). And I think AI and automation can already do much of the cleaning and labeling (eg, ETL), in ways that are better cheaper faster than humans.

AI is being taught how to write and train its own algorithms (steps 1 and 3).

I’m not sure about state of AI art for steps (4) and (5). Step 4 (human feedback) seems hardest because, well, ipso facto. But there are early signs “human feedback” is not all that unique, whether using AI to generate synthetic data, or to perform tasks by “acting like humans” (eg, acting like a therapist), or labeling images, etc.

Step (5) is definitely within reach, given all the viral Twitter threads we’ve seen where AI can build websites and apps and debug code.

So eventually we’ll have AI that can do most if not all of steps 1-7. AI that can write itself, train itself, go out and do stuff in the world, evaluate how well it’s done, and then improve on all of the above. All at digital speed, scale, and with incremental costs falling to zero.

Truly something to behold. And in that world, where will humans be most useful, if anywhere?

Just a fascinating thought experiment, is all. 🧐🧐🧐

These times are only gettin’ weirder.

Using ChatGPT (GPT-4) to study Chinese song lyrics

Recently I wanted to understand the lyrics for 青花瓷, but I couldn’t find good translations through Google since the writing is fairly dense and symbolic. For me it reads like a Tang poem or something. Google Translate was nearly meaningless.

So I turned to ChatGPT (using GPT-4) and boy did it deliver! I was giddy when I saw the first reply to my simple prompt:

chatgpt gpt4 song lyrics

Wow! It’s got everything I need.

I really want to use ChatGPT more. One of the downsides of being in my late 30s is that I’m so *comfortable* with my existing tech habits that it takes more consistent reminding and constant pushing to build a new one.

But this leap feels to me like it’s bigger than when internet search first became fairly good. I’m thinking back to like, the improvement that was Altavista, let alone Google

Podcast notes: Sam Altman (OpenAI CEO) on Lex Fridman – “Consciousness…something very strange is going on”

// everything is paraphrased from Sam’s perspective unless otherwise noted

Base model is useful, but adding RLHF – take human feedback (eg, of two outputs, which is better) – works remarkably well with remarkably little data to make model more useful

Pre training dataset – lots of open source DBs, partnerships – a lot of work is building great dataset

“We should be in awe that we got to this level” (re GPT 4)

Eval = how to measure a model after you’ve trained it

Compressing all of the web into an organized box of human knowledge

“I suspect too much processing power is using model as database” (versus as a reasoning engine)

Every time we put out new model – outside world teaches us a lot – shape technology with us

ChatGPT bias – “not something I felt proud of”
Answer will be to give users more personalized, granular control

Hope these models bring more nuance to world

Important for progress on alignment to increase faster than progress on capabilities

GPT4 = most capable and most aligned model they’ve done
RLHF is important component of alignment
Better alignment > better capabilities and vice-versa

Tuned GPT4 to follow system message (prompt) closely
There are people who spend 12 hours/day, treat it like debugging software, get a feel for model, how prompts work together

Dialogue and iterating with AI / computer as a partner tool – that’s a really big deal

Dream scenario: have a US constitutional convention for AI, agree on rules and system, democratic process, builders have this baked in, each country and user can set own rules / boundaries

Doesn’t like being scolded by a computer — “has a visceral response”

At OpenAI, we’re good at finding lots of small wins, the detail and care applied — the multiplicative impact is large

People getting caught up in parameter count race, similar to gigahertz processor race
OpenAI focuses on just doing whatever works (eg, their focus on scaling LLMs)

We need to expand on GPT paradigm to discover novel new science

If we don’t build AGI but make humans super great — still a huge win

Most programmers think GPT is amazing, makes them 10x more productive

AI can deliver extraordinary increase in quality of life
People want status, drama, people want to create, AI won’t eliminate that

Eliezer Yudkowsky’s AI criticisms – wrote a good blog post on AI alignment, despite much of writing being hard to understand / having logical flaws

Need a tight feedback loop – continue to learn from what we learn

Surprised a bit by ChatGPT reception – thought it would be, eg, 10th fastest growing software product, not 1st
Knew GPT4 would be good – remarkable that we’re even debating whether it’s AGI or not

Re: AI takeoff, believes in slow takeoff, short timelines

Lex: believes GPT4 can fake consciousness

Ilya S said if you trained a model that had no data or training examples whatsoever related to consciousness, yet it could immediately understand when a user described what consciousness felt like

Lex on Ex Machina: consciousness is when you smile for no audience, experience for its own sake

Consciousness
something very strange is going on

// Stopped taking notes ~halfway