[tomNth]

"reading through this entire blog post" ?

Is

"The Physically Embodied Bear" "95%+ will include taking physical, real-world actions."

not a mention of "construction, manual labour, mechanics, welders, painters" and "blue-collar workers" ?

[vallode]

The paragraph was my exact problem, hundreds of words but the entire world of AI interacting with the world physically is boiled down into an assumption that "by the time we get there, we'll get there". It just doesn't seem realistic? Especially with predictions/hunches like the ones found in the article.

Others seem to mention it is a sort of feedback look, once we get to 50% AGI I guess that AI itself can help us overcome the physical limitations. I'm sceptical that it is as simple as that, but at the same time can see it as very much possible.

How much do current AIs contribute to their own development? Likely quite a bit, but then again I don't know any AI researchers to ask.

[pixl97]

>How much do current AIs contribute to their own development?

Really a pretty fair amount these days as AIs can contribute to their own training data. In addition they've got pretty good at measuring their own success. In the past for example, if you had a robot hammer hitting a nail, you'd have a person judging the quality of the strike, but now you can face a few cameras at it and self judge far better. Yea, you still need some people around, but the amount required has dropped a lot.