Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

rodneybrooks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 190 posts

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#21

Post by Denzel »

laweijfmvo wrote: post #14
sashank_1509 wrote: post #6

Feels too self-congratulatory when he claims to be correct about self driving in the Waymo case. The bar he set is so broad and ambiguous, that probably anything Waymo did, would not qualify as self driving to him. So he think humans are intervening once every 1-2 miles to train the Waymo, we’re not even sure if that is true, I heard from friends that it was 100+ miles but let us say Waymo comes out and says it is 10…

Waymo is the best driver I’ve ridden with. Yes it has limited coverage. Maybe humans are intervening, but unless someone can prove that humans are intervening multiple times per ride, “self driving” is here, IMO, as of 2024.

In what sense is self-driving “here” if the economics alone prove that it can’t get “here”? It’s not just limited coverage, it’s practically non-existent coverage, both nationally and globally, with no evidence that the system can generalize, profitably, outside the limited areas it’s currently in.

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#22

Post by Animats »

brcmthrowaway wrote: post #17
Animats wrote: post #10

> That being said, we are not on the verge of replacing and eliminating humans in either white collar jobs or blue collar jobs. Tell that to someone laid off when replaced by some "AI" system. > Waymo not autonomous enough It's not clear how often Waymo cars need remote attention, but it's not every 1-2 miles. Customers would notice the vehicle being stopped and stuck during the wait for customer service. There are m…

What is the silver bullet for battery tech?

Solid state batteries. Prototypes work, but high-volume manufacturing doesn't work yet. The major battery manufacturers are all trying to get this to production. Early versions will probably be expensive.

Maybe a 2x improvement in kwh/kg. Much less risk of fire or thermal runaway. Charging in < 10 mins.

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#23

Post by mberning »

zzzeek wrote: post #20

what a weird writer, lots of interesting things to talk about but this very long essay continued to circle back to being author-self-obsessed with their own prowess and drawing out huge expositions and bullet lists on how well they are at predicting things. Call it self-referential-appeal-to-authority.

It is odd. The product of a mind which clearly thinks very highly of itself.

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#24

Post by lolinder »

shlomo_z wrote: post #13
Animats wrote: post #10

> That being said, we are not on the verge of replacing and eliminating humans in either white collar jobs or blue collar jobs. Tell that to someone laid off when replaced by some "AI" system. > Waymo not autonomous enough It's not clear how often Waymo cars need remote attention, but it's not every 1-2 miles. Customers would notice the vehicle being stopped and stuck during the wait for customer service. There are m…

> Tell that to someone laid off when replaced by some "AI" system. What are some good examples? I am very skeptical of anyone losing their jobs to AI. People are getting laid off for various reasons: - Companies are replacing American tech jobs with foreigners - Many companies hired more devs than they need - companies hired many devs during the pandemic, and don't need them anymore Some companies may claim they are…

> I believe some devs were probably replaced by AI, but not a large amount.

I'm not even sold on the idea that there were any. The media likes to blame AI for the developer layoffs because it makes a much more exciting story than interest rates and arcane tax code changes.

But the fact is that we don't need more than the Section 174 changes and the end of ZIRP to explain what's happened in tech. Federal economic policy was set up to direct massive amounts of investment into software development. Now it's not. That's a real, quantifiable impact that can readily explain what we've seen in a way that the current productivity gains from these tools simply can't.

Now, I'll definitely accept that many companies are attributing their layoffs to AI, but that's for much the same reason that the media laps the story up: it's a far better line to feed investors than that the financial environment has changed for the worse.

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#25

Post by ynniv »

It's long, so I'm skimming a little and... flying cars. If you don't know why we don't have flying cars, you're not a good engineer.

It really doesn't matter what prestigious lab you ran, as that apparently didn't impart the ability to think critically about engineering problems.

[Hint: Flying takes 10x the energy of driving, and the cost/weight/volume of 1 MJ hasn't changed in close to a hundred years. Flying cars require a 10x energy breakthrough.]

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#26

Post by Denzel »

rexreed wrote: post #4
gcr wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NET2021 means that he predicted that the event would take place on or after 2021, so happening in 2024 satisfies that. Keep in mind these are six-year-old predictions. Are you wishing that he had tighter confidence intervals?

If the predictions are meant to be bold, then yes. If they're meant to be fairly obvious, then no. For example, saying that flying cars will be in widespread use NET 2025 is not much of a prediction. I think we can all say that if flying cars will be in widespread use, it will happen No Earlier Than 2025. It could happen in 2060, and that NET 2025 prediction would still be true. He could mark it green in 2026 and say…

Presumably you read the section where Brooks highlights all the forecasts executives were making in 2017? His NET predictions act as a sort of counter-prediction to those types of blind optimistic, overly confident assertions.

In that context, I’d say his predictions are neither obvious nor lacking boldness when we have influential people running around claiming that AGI is here today, AI agents will enter the workforce this year, and we should be prepared for AI-enabled layoffs.

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#27

Post by mvdtnz »

sashank_1509 wrote: post #11
mvdtnz wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your objection to him claiming a win on self driving is that you think that we can still define cars as self driving even when humans are operating them? Ok I disagree. If humans are operating them then they simply are not self driving by any sensible definition.

Human interventions are some non zero number in current self driving cars and will likely be that way for a while. Does this mean self driving is a scam and in fact it is just a human driving, and that these are actually ADAS. Maybe in some pedantic sense, you are right but then your definition is not useful, since it lumps cruise control/ lane-keeping ADAS and Waymo’s in the same category. Waymo is genuinely, qualit…

No one said scam (although in the case of Tesla it absolutely is). It's just not a solved problem yet.

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#28

Post by AlotOfReading »

Denzel wrote: post #21
laweijfmvo wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waymo is the best driver I’ve ridden with. Yes it has limited coverage. Maybe humans are intervening, but unless someone can prove that humans are intervening multiple times per ride, “self driving” is here, IMO, as of 2024.

In what sense is self-driving “here” if the economics alone prove that it can’t get “here”? It’s not just limited coverage, it’s practically non-existent coverage, both nationally and globally, with no evidence that the system can generalize, profitably, outside the limited areas it’s currently in.

It's covering significant areas of 3 major metros, and the core of one minor, with testing deployments in several other major metros. Considering the top 10 metros are >70% of the US ridehail market, that seems like a long way beyond "non-existent" coverage nationally.

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#30

Post by anon7000 »

ynniv wrote: post #25

It's long, so I'm skimming a little and... flying cars. If you don't know why we don't have flying cars, you're not a good engineer. It really doesn't matter what prestigious lab you ran, as that apparently didn't impart the ability to think critically about engineering problems. [Hint: Flying takes 10x the energy of driving, and the cost/weight/volume of 1 MJ hasn't changed in close to a hundred years. Flying cars r…

The article is not optimistic on flying cars. The prediction is that an expensive flying car could be purchased no earlier than 2036, and notes a strong possibility that it won’t even happen by 2050. Plus states that minor success (aka 0.1% of car sales are flying cars) isn’t going to happen in his lifetime.

The author also expands on this:

> Don’t hold your breath. They are not here. They are not coming soon.

> Nothing has changed. Billions of dollars have been spent on this fantasy of personal flying cars. It is just that, a fantasy, largely fueled by spending by billionaires.

It’s worth actually reading the article before trashing someone’s career and engineering skills!

Post reply on HN