Live data from Hacker News

AI 2027

ai-2027.com

21–30 of 641 posts

Re: AI 2027

#21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's an example of an intellectual task that you don't think AI will be capable of by 2027?

programming

Why would it get 60-80% as good as human programmers (which is what the current state of things feels like to me, as a programmer, using these tools for hours every day), but stop there?

Re: AI 2027

#23
post #13

> "OpenBrain (the leading US AI project) builds AI agents that are good enough to dramatically accelerate their research. The humans, who up until very recently had been the best AI researchers on the planet, sit back and watch the AIs do their jobs, making better and better AI systems." I'm not sure what gives the authors the confidence to predict such statements. Wishful thinking? Worst-case paranoia? I agree that…

It's my belief (and I'm far from the only person who thinks this) that many AI optimists are motivated by an essentially religious belief that you could call Singularitarianism. So "wishful thinking" would be one answer. This document would then be the rough equivalent of a Christian fundamentalist outlining, on the basis of tangentially related news stories, how the Second Coming will come to pass in the next few years.

Re: AI 2027

#24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

programming

Why would it get 60-80% as good as human programmers (which is what the current state of things feels like to me, as a programmer, using these tools for hours every day), but stop there?

Because ewe still haven't figured out fusion but its been promised for decades. Why would everything thats been promised by people with highly vested interests pan out any different?

One is inherently a more challenging physics problem.

Re: AI 2027

#25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

programming

Why would it get 60-80% as good as human programmers (which is what the current state of things feels like to me, as a programmer, using these tools for hours every day), but stop there?

It's 60-80% as good as Stack Overflow copy-pasting programmers, sure, but those programmers were already providing questionable value.

It's nowhere near as good as someone actually building and maintaining systems. It's barely able to vomit out an MVP and it's almost never capable of making a meaningful change to that MVP.

If your experiences have been different that's fine, but in my day job I am spending more and more time just fixing crappy LLM code produced and merged by STAFF engineers. I really don't see that changing any time soon.

Re: AI 2027

#26
post #16

There's a lot to potentially unpack here, but idk, the idea that humanity entering hell (extermination) or heaven (brain uploading; aging cure) is whether or not we listen to AI safety researchers for a few months makes me question whether it's really worth unpacking.

If we don't do it, someone else will.

[flagged]

Re: AI 2027

#27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

programming

Why would it get 60-80% as good as human programmers (which is what the current state of things feels like to me, as a programmer, using these tools for hours every day), but stop there?

[deleted]

Re: AI 2027

#28
post #5

Ok, I'll bite. I predict that everything in this article is horse manure. AGI will not happen. LLMs will be tools, that can automate away stuff, like today and they will get slightly, or quite a bit better at it. That will be all. See you in two years, I'm excited what will be the truth.

I predict AGI will be solved 5 years after full self driving which itself is 1 year out (same as it has been for the past 10 years).

Re: AI 2027

#29
post #9

Older and related article from one of the authors titled "What 2026 looks like", that is holding up very well against time. Written in mid 2021 (pre ChatGPT) https://www.alignmentforum.org/posts/6Xgy6CAf2jqHhynHL/what-... //edit: remove the referral tags from URL

That's incredible how much it broadly aligns with what has happened. Especially because it was before ChatGPT.

Re: AI 2027

#30

I just spent some time trying to make claude and gemini make a violin plot of some polar dataframe. I've never used it and it's just for prototyping so i just went "apply a log to the values and make a violin plot of this polars dataframe". ANd had to iterate with them for 4/5 times each. Gemini got it right but then used deprecated methods I might be doing llm wrong, but i just can't get how people might actually do…

You're asking it to think and it can't.

It's spicy auto complete. Ask it to create a program that can create a violin plot from a CVS file. Because this has been "done before", it will do a decent job.

Post reply on HN