Saturday, November 2, 2024
Latest:
Videos

Tomaso Poggio: Brains, Minds, and Machines | MIT Artificial Intelligence (AI) Podcast

Artis Modus



Lex Fridman

Tomaso Poggio is a professor at MIT and is the director of the Center for Brains, Minds, and Machines. Cited over 100,000 times, his work has had a profound impact on our understanding of the nature of intelligence, in both biological neural networks and artificial ones. He has been an advisor to many highly-impactful researchers and entrepreneurs in AI, including Demis Hassabis of DeepMind, Amnon Shashua of MobileEye, and Christof Koch of the Allen Institute for Brain Science. This conversation is part of the Artificial Intelligence podcast and the MIT course 6.S099: Artificial General Intelligence. The conversation and lectures are free and open to everyone. Audio podcast version is available on https://lexfridman.com/ai/

INFO:
Podcast website: https://lexfridman.com/ai
Course website: https://deeplearning.mit.edu
YouTube Playlist: http://bit.ly/2EcbaKf

CONNECT:
– Subscribe to this YouTube channel
– Twitter: https://twitter.com/lexfridman
– LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lexfridman
– Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/lexfridman
– Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lexfridman

Source

Similar Posts

46 thoughts on “Tomaso Poggio: Brains, Minds, and Machines | MIT Artificial Intelligence (AI) Podcast”

  1. 7:20 – why I transferred from biotech to comp sci, AI (if we can make it human level or greater) will potentially be the fastest route to the greatest rates of technological development.

  4. Subjectivity could be the nucleus to AGI. What's missing in technology today is subjectivity, not the definition of intelligence. If the robot is subjected to GI then it will become AGI. Sofia the robot is a perfect example, I'm sure she will exhibit AGI eventually.

  5. Simple, so yeah intelligence it's making conscious of the logic that governs us and management better.

    Love its just attraction, by pure logic you love anything, you have it or not you will fear losing it or not having it and you will hate or defend what you love…
    Love, fear, and hate are perfectly connected… Buda teaches this that's why he says, detachment, it's the way to end suffering.
    You can program a robot or computer to emulate this emotion and behavior.

    Love its attraction, Fear its defend, Hate its attack.

  12. 51:51 can anyone pls explain the part where Tomaso says one caricature of computer history is first we have expensive programmers , then cheap labelers and the future would be schools like we have for kids?

  15. The problem with Max Tegmark's argument is also that he believes his idea about the world as physics describes it, is the reality itself. Bur it may really narrow down to the fact we describe reality on those terms, in mathematical language based around the principle of equilibrium, etc, because this is what our brain allows us to do. It might be that if we had a "different kind" of brain, we would discover a different kind of "mathematics", that is to say a symbolic logic based on different principles, which are unimaginable to us.
    The common belief amongst many physicists that scientific equations are the description of reality can not be supported logically (because of extrapolation of Godel paradox). This is a kind of hubris a neuroscientist, or even Lacanian psychologist can easily point out. There is a difference between what's Real(which we never directly encounter), and our Symbolic imagination about it. When you approach the foundation of physics with clear mind you must accept that ideas such as Force or Energy are metaphysical ideas, which function only within a linguistic structures of our minds, and are not found in nature. Every physicist should know the difference between a physical phenomenon, and the description of that phenomenon. Nobody have ever observed a force or an energy, only, as we are used to put it – the effects of force and energy. But to claim World is an effect of something (like energy of singularity) is itself a philosophical a'priori idea, coming directly from Newtonian a'priori definition f a Force. It's a very simple bit of reasoning which all physicists almost deliberately refuse to accept.
    The map is not the territory, no matter how good your map is. And let's be frank, physics account for a minuscule part of world phenomena, they simply decided to call everything they know nothing about "noise", or "chaos". It's a really cheap trick.

  19. – electrical engineers creating computer components could be likened to neurologists and neurosciencentists on a low level
    – IT professionals could be equated to a psycologist or psychiatrist, helping us as the users to troubleshoot the software
    – what we are looking to do here as programmers is to bridge that gap, creating an emulator for the whole system, needing to understand both sides of the mind and how they fit together

    There is not yet an equivalent to emulator programmer for the human mind to help us programmers understand this connection.

  23. This was a fascinating conversation on many levels. I found Thomaso to be the ideal mentor I would like to have, openess, curiosity, ambition and fun in the journey of understanding and discovery. It would be great to have his points summarized, he shed some great light on a lot of questions. I specially enjoyed the ones on how we are beginning to understand NN, like the high probabilties of finding a global minima in a highly paramatrized model due to high number of prameters and the fact that hidden layers somehow solve the need for having N ^ Dimensions parameters in order to approximate the function, wasn't completely sure I understood if N was the error percentage boundary that you want or if 10 is a rule and 10% error was just a boundary. Anyway thanks to you both.

  29. Alcoholic lip. Dad had that, too. i suspect this AI generated. i don't remember ever subscribing to lex fridman's channel. Imagine my surprise when i noticed subscribed in grey.

  30. Another brilliant conversation. Thank you gentlemen. I think on these matters, and the conversations on this channel are resonating and fascinating.

  31. I would vote for a spoiler alert about "Flowers for Algernon" at 1:18:30
    Such a great book and much more effective if the reader doesn't know how the plot proceeds.
    BTW, I love your work, Lex. You are one of my favorite interviewers. It has been astonishing to watch your skills progress. Excellent series.

  33. This is why time travel is so hard – the first civilization who win all wars in the universe realized time machine is ultimate weapon to end all wars as Avenger Endgame suggested, they decided to go to the roots of everyone else to make sure no one else can ever make a time machine. Just kidding! Another conspiracy no one can ever prove and disprove.

  37. Anti conformist
    Never buy if everyone is buying
    Mysteries of the universe – time travel
    Is time travel possible?
    Freeze ourselves. Space travel at the speed of light

  39. Problem of intelliegence. origin of life. Origin of the universe
    Solve all the problems. Key to intelligence
    Gradient descent – adjust parameters

    Reinforcement learning.
    Polynomial s

  42. I found your question r/g "compositionality" at around 35 minutes into the video very interesting ….where Tegmark takes it as 'atoms/quarks/the four forces' are "real" and Poggio takes it as 'we evolved to survive via compositionlizing the physical universe' but sadly neither Poggio or Tegmark ever question whether we're still basing our conclusions on wrong assumptions and thus why it's all so confusing and not 'fitting' to what we observe – the "flat earth or geocentric syndrome". Wonder why these two (or many other very intelligent and gifted scientists) don't question – could it be that reality is some form of a computation from within which our brains evolved to compositionalize/simulate a world of people/places/things/space….thus all these things/parameters (including atoms/quarks/etc) are not what the brains see/observe but actually CREATE as some form of simulated version of things/people/places/space. That to me is the only explanation of how the brains do what they do. There's no way in the world where neurons firing or not firing (regardless of how 'complex' the networks be) can RE-create the 'real external physical world' within the skull other than the more likely scenario of the brain's computation "CREATING" the simulated external virtual world (similar to how it does that during our dreams). I think people like Joscha Back and Steven Wolfram are closer to what's going on then unfortunately some of these other geniuses who are still stuck on trying to explain all this while believing very strongly on the existence of a 'real' physical world out there …..not much different than very intelligent 'flat earthers' trying to come up with deep explanations on why we can't find the edge of the earth or why it doesn't go on forever!

  43. 18 U.S.C. § 2319, 18 U.S.C. § 1505, U.S. Code § 371, 18 U.S.C. § 1001 U.S. Code § 2320, § 1622, § 1621, § 1031, § 114.

    Look at the future PROBLEMS that are already spilling out into the public domain and being used on people in a clandestine fashion… keep your feet on the ground.

    https://twitter.com/galaviz_ryan/status/1203379478161842176?s=20 – The emergence of the Quantum level issues that are arising from the misuse of computing on people via privately funded experiments from the affluent.

    https://twitter.com/galaviz_ryan/status/1203372462924132352?s=20 – AGI problems and civilians.

    https://twitter.com/galaviz_ryan/status/1203372520323182592?s=20 – AGI problems and civilians…

  44. "I wish I had never been born!" the Brahmin remarked.

    "Why so?" said I.

    "Because," he replied, "I have been studying these forty years, and I find that it has been so much time lost…I believe that I am composed of matter, but I have never been able to satisfy myself what it is that produces thought. I am even ignorant whether my understanding is a simple faculty like that of walking or digesting, or if I think with my head in the same manner as I take hold of a thing with my hands…I talk a great deal, and when I have done speaking I remain confounded and ashamed of what I have said."

    …

    "Are you not ashamed to be thus miserable when, not fifty yards from you, there is an old automaton who thinks of nothing and lives contented?"

    "You are right," he replied. "I have said to myself a thousand times that I should be happy if I were but as ignorant as my old neighbor; and yet it is a happiness which I do not desire."

  45. So wonderful to have an expert so openly admit they didn't know something… (right at the end) even while being bigged-up, and pause for deep thought. Respect 👍

  46. 56:35 When to worry? Google replies 12 to "how many is 3 x 4" as it's a common question pattern. Worry when it can answer unheard of questions like "how many legs has a policeman".

Comments are closed.

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com