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

AI 2027

ai-2027.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 641 posts

Re: AI 2027

#101

Post by HDThoreaun »

henryjcee wrote: post #94
hiq wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> had to iterate with them for 4/5 times each. Gemini got it right but then used deprecated methods How hard would it be to automate these iterations? How hard would it be to automatically check and improve the code to avoid deprecated methods? I agree that most products are still underwhelming, but that doesn't mean that the underlying tech is not already enough to deliver better LLM-based products. Lately I've been…

> How hard would it be to automate these iterations? The fact that we're no closer to doing this than we were when chatgpt launched suggests that it's really hard. If anything I think it's _the_ hard bit vs. building something that generates plausible text. Solving this for the general case is imo a completely different problem to being able to generate plausible text in the general case.

This is not true. The chain of logic models are able to check their work and try again given enough compute.

Re: AI 2027

#102

Post by crazystar »

Jun8 wrote: post #96

ACT post where Scott Alexander provides some additional info: https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/introducing-ai-2027 . Manifold currently predicts 30%: https://manifold.markets/IsaacKing/ai-2027-reports-predictio...

47% now soo a coin toss

Re: AI 2027

#103

Post by nmilo »

The whole thing hinges on the fact that AI will be able to help with AI research

How will it come up with the theoretical breakthroughs necessary to beat the scaling problem GPT-4.5 revealed when it hasn't been proven that LLMs can come up with novel research in any field at all?

Re: AI 2027

#104

Post by acje »

2028 human text is too ambiguous a data source to get to AGI. 2127 AGI figures out flying cars and fusion power.

Re: AI 2027

#105

Post by archagon »

IshKebab wrote: post #89
ctoth wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Sure 5 years: AI coding assistants are a lot better than they are now, but still can't actually replace junior engineers (at least ones that aren't shit). AI fraud is rampant, with faked audio commonplace. Some companies try replacing call centres with AI, but it doesn't really work and everyone hates it. Tesla's robotaxi won't be available, but Waymo will be in most major US cities. 10 years: AI assistants are now u…

> Small light computers become fast enough that autonomous slaughter it's become reality

This is the real scary bit. I'm not convinced that AI will ever be good enough to think independently and create novel things without some serious human supervision, but none of that matters when applied to machines that are destructive by design and already have expectations of collateral damage. Slaughterbots are going to be the new WMDs — and corporations are salivating at the prospect of being first movers. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiiqiaUBAL8

Re: AI 2027

#106

Post by abecedarius »

mitthrowaway2 wrote: post #42
coolThingsFirst wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

programming

Can you phrase this in a concrete way, so that in 2027 we can all agree whether it's true or false, rather than circling a "no true scotsman" argument?

Good question. I tried to phrase a concrete-enough prediction 3.5 years ago, for 5 years out at the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29020401

It was surpassed around the beginning of this year, so you'll need to come up with a new one for 2027. Note that the other opinions in that older HN thread almost all expected less.

Re: AI 2027

#107

Post by stavros »

botro wrote: post #70
beklein wrote: 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'.

I think the bureaucracies part is referring more to Deep Research than to MoE.

Re: AI 2027

#109

Post by archagon »

infecto wrote: post #56

Could not get through the entire thing. It’s mostly a bunch of fantasy intermingled with bits of possible interesting discussion points. The whole right side metrics are purely a distraction because entirely fiction.

Website design is nice, though.

Re: AI 2027

#110

Post by suddenlybananas »

VOIPThrowaway wrote: post #30
amarcheschi wrote: post #12

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.

But this blog post said that it's going to be God in like 5 years?!
Post reply on HN