Live data from Hacker News

AI 2027

ai-2027.com

61–70 of 641 posts

Re: AI 2027

#61
post #10
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.

That seems naive in a status quo bias way to me. Why and where do you expect AI progress to stop? It sounds like somewhere very close to where we are at in your eyes. Why do you think there won't be many further improvements?

It seems to me that much of recent AI progress has not changed the fundamental scaling principles underlying the tech. Reasoning models are more effective, but at the cost of more computation: it's more for more, not more for less. The logarithmic relationship between model resources and model quality (as Altman himself has characterized it), phrased a different way, means that you need exponentially more energy and resources for each marginal increase in capabilities. GPT-4.5 is unimpressive in comparison to GPT-4, and at least from the outside it seems like it cost an awful lot of money. Maybe GPT-5 is slightly less unimpressive and significantly more expensive: is that the through-line that will lead to the singularity?

Compare the automobile. Automobiles today are a lot nicer than they were 50 years ago, and a lot more efficient. Does that mean cars that never need fuel or recharging are coming soon, just because the trend has been higher efficiency? No, because the fundamental physical realities of drag still limit efficiency. Moreover, it turns out that making 100% efficient engines with 100% efficient regenerative brakes is really hard, and "just throw more research at it" isn't a silver bullet. That's not "there won't be many future improvements", but it is "those future improvements probably won't be any bigger than the jump from GPT-3 to o1, which does not extrapolate to what OP claims their models will do in 2027."

AI in 2027 might be the metaphorical brand-new Lexus to today's beat-up Kia. That doesn't mean it will drive ten times faster, or take ten times less fuel. Even if high-end cars can be significantly more efficient than what average people drive, that doesn't mean the extra expense is actually worth it.

Re: AI 2027

#62

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…

Yes, you're most likely doing it wrong. I would like to add that "vibe coding" is a dreadful term thought up by someone who is arguably not very good at software engineering, as talented as he may be in other respects. The term has become a misleading and frankly pejorative term. A better, more neutral one is AI assisted software engineering. This is an article that describes a pretty good approach for that: https://…

You see, the issue I get petty about is that Ai is advertised as the one ring to rule them all software. VCs creaming themselves at the thought of not having to pay developers and using natural language. But then, you have to still adapt to the Ai, and not vice versa. "you're doing it wrong". This is not the idea that VCs bros are selling

Then, I absolutely love being aided by llms for my day to day tasks. I'm much more efficient when studying and they can be a game changer when you're stuck and you don't know how to proceed. You can discuss different implementation ideas as if you had a colleague, perhaps not a PhD smart one but still someone with a quite deep knowledge of everything

But, it's no miracle. That's the issue I have with the way the idea of Ai is sold to the c suites and the general public

Re: AI 2027

#63
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

It won't be able to write a compelling novel, or build a software system solving a real-world problem, or operate heavy machinery, create a sprite sheet or 3d models, design a building or teach. Long term planning and execution and operating in the physical world is not within reach. Slight variations of known problems should be possible (as long as the size of the solution is small enough).

I'm pretty sure you're wrong for at least 2 of those:

For 3D models, check out blender-mcp:

https://old.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1joaowb/claude...

https://old.reddit.com/r/aiwars/comments/1jbsn86/claude_crea...

Also this:

https://old.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1hejglg/tr...

For teaching, I'm using it to learn about tech I'm unfamiliar with every day, it's one of the things it's the most amazing at.

For the things where the tolerance for mistakes is extremely low and the things where human oversight is extremely importamt, you might be right. It won't have to be perfect (just better than an average human) for that to happen, but I'm not sure if it will.

Re: AI 2027

#64
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 m…

I'm pretty good at what I do, at least according to myself and the people I work with, and I'm comparing its capabilities (the latest version of Claude used as an agent inside Cursor) to myself. It can't fully do things on its own and makes mistakes, but it can do a lot. But suppose you're right, it's 60% as good as "stackoverflow copy-pasting programmers". Isn't that a pretty insanely impressive milestone to just di…

I appreciate your reply. My tone was a little dismissive; I'm currently deep deep in the trenches trying to unwind a tremendous amount of LLM slop in my team's codebase so I'm a little sensitive.

I use Claude every day. It is definitely impressive, but in my experience only marginally more impressive than ChatGPT was a few years ago. It hallucinates less and compiles more reliably, but still produces really poor designs. It really is an overconfident junior developer.

The real risk, and what I am seeing daily, is colleagues falling for the "if you aren't using Cursor you're going to be left behind" FUD. So they learn Cursor, discover that it's an easy way to close tickets without using your brain, and end up polluting the codebase with very questionable designs.

Re: AI 2027

#65
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

How does it talk about GPT-1 or 3 if it was before ChatGPT?

GPT-3 (and, naturally, all prior versions even farther back) was released ~2 years before ChatGPT (whose launch model was GPT-3.5)

The publication date on this article is about halfway between GPT-3 and ChatGPT releases.

Re: AI 2027

#66
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

How does it talk about GPT-1 or 3 if it was before ChatGPT?

GPT-2 for example came out in 2019. ChatGPT wasn't the start of GPT.

Re: AI 2027

#67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Try this, launch Cursor. Type: print all prime numbers which are divisible by 3 up to 1M The result is that it will do a sieve. There's no need for this, it's just 3.

Just tried this with Gemini 2.5 Pro. Got it right with meaningful thought process.

Re: AI 2027

#69

This is hilariously over-optimistic on the timescales. Like on this timeline we'll have a Mars colony in 10 years, immortality drugs in 15 and Half Life 3 in 20.

Can you share your detailed projection of what you expect the future to look like so I can compare?

Re: AI 2027

#70
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

This is damn near prescient, I'm having a hard time believing it was written in 2021.

He did get this part wrong though, we ended up calling them 'Mixture of Experts' instead of 'AI bureaucracies'.

Post reply on HN