Tim Scarfe: commitment

Transcript context

…ible, I think, at least for me, that there are algorithms that don't have humans that could take similar trajectories through search space. Maybe not quite as, like, perfect as the human trajectories. You know, I I wouldn't be surprised if we can't actually hit that ideal, but there's probably a continuum where you could come closer. And then what are the implications? You know, if the order principles that lead to your final understanding of the world matters for how you represent the world, and therefore for your ability to be creative in the future, then does it matter the order in which we allow these large models to encounter the different principles that they encounter on the road to total understanding of everything in the universe. And I mean, I would guess, like, this implies probably yes. It probably matters, and that opens up a huge range of possible creative opportunities for alternative ways of thinking about training that would lead to better representations. You brought in the open endedness aspect, which is fascinating, because you're saying they weren't looking for the skull. Right? So what were they looking for? They were, composing these primitive basis functions that they have in their mind so they know that symmetry is good. Where did they get the symmetry idea from? Well, it must be somehow gleaned. And so actually our function space is restricted in some very important way. We know that we have certain things we can compose, and we know that we can compose them in certain topologies, and we know that invariably if we follow that trajectory, we will land on interesting things, even though we don't necessarily know exactly what we will land on. Mhmm.…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.