AI 2027 • Hacker News Board

Re: AI 2027

#601

Post by wkat4242 » Sat, Apr 05, 2025, 10:43 PM UTC

gmoot wrote: post #241

torlok wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't try to reason with this population collapse nonsense. This has always been about racists fearing that "not enough" white westerners are being born, or about industrialists wanting infinite growth. For some prominent technocrats it's both.

The welfare state is predicated on a pyramid-shaped population. Also: people deride infinite growth, but growth is what is responsible for lifting large portions of the population out of poverty. If global markets were repriced tomorrow to expect no future growth, economies would collapse. There may be a way to accept low or no growth without economic collapse, but if there is no one has figured it out yet. That's no…

> The welfare state is predicated on a pyramid-shaped population.

America isn't a welfare state, I think this much is clear :) It's welfare for the rich only.

> Also: people deride infinite growth, but growth is what is responsible for lifting large portions of the population out of poverty. If global markets were repriced tomorrow to expect no future growth, economies would collapse.

We don't have infinite resources so infinite growth is just impossible. And a fairer distribution of wealth can also lift populations out of poverty. The problem is the people that have a lot of wealth also have a lot of power they can wield to keep it that way.

Re: AI 2027

#602

Post by wkat4242 » Sat, Apr 05, 2025, 10:45 PM UTC

ahtihn wrote: post #305

wkat4242 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really get the American preoccupation with birth rates. We're already way overpopulated for our planet and this is showing in environmental issues, housing cost, overcrowded cities etc. It's totally a great thing if we start plateauing our population and even reduce it a bit. And no we're not going extinct. It'll just cause some temporary issues like an ageing population that has to be cared for but those iss…

The planet is absolutely not over populated. Overcrowded cities and housing costs aren't an overpopulation problem but a problem of concentrating economic activity in certain places.

Yes it is. It's not about space to live. It's about resources that are running out (and thus causing wars over them and other instability).

Re: AI 2027

#603

Post by wkat4242 » Sat, Apr 05, 2025, 10:47 PM UTC

scryers_bloom wrote: post #472

wkat4242 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really get the American preoccupation with birth rates. We're already way overpopulated for our planet and this is showing in environmental issues, housing cost, overcrowded cities etc. It's totally a great thing if we start plateauing our population and even reduce it a bit. And no we're not going extinct. It'll just cause some temporary issues like an ageing population that has to be cared for but those iss…

We are not overpopulated. I hate the type of people that hammer the idea that society needs to double or triple the birthrate (Elon Musk), but as it currently stands, countries like South Korea, Japan, USA, China, and Germany risk extinction or economic collapse in 4-5 generations if the birth rate doesn't rise or the way we guarantee welfare doesn't change.

We're not really overpopulated yet because the majority of humanity doesn't have two cents to rub against each other. They also want their cars, their houses, their netflix. This is what will really kill the planet.

Re: AI 2027

#604

Post by clayhacks » Sun, Apr 06, 2025, 2:50 AM UTC

MugaSofer wrote: post #79

porphyra wrote: post #41

Seems very sinophobic. Deepseek and Manus have shown that China is legitimately an innovation powerhouse in AI but this article makes it sound like they will just keep falling behind without stealing.

That whole section seems to be pretty directly based on DeepSeek's "very impressive work" with R1 being simultaneously very impressive, and several months behind OpenAI. (They more or less say as much in footnote 36.) They blame this on US chip controls just barely holding China back from the cutting edge by a few months. I wouldn't call that a knock on Chinese innovation.

But it also assumes China would never really catch up to American chip companies. China is already investing heavily in chip R&D and things like RISC-V, I think it’s very plausible that lag window shrinks over this horizon. Perhaps even flipping given their much larger willingness to use industrial policy for goals they want achieved.

Re: AI 2027

#605

Post by marxplank » Sun, Apr 06, 2025, 6:08 AM UTC

zvorygin wrote: post #588

akra wrote: post #565

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what I think as well. Unfortunately for the AI proponents they already made an example of the software industry. Its on news reports in the US and globally; most people are no longer recommending to get into the industry, etc. Software for better or worse has made an example for other industries as to what "not to do" both w.r.t data (online and option), and culture (e.g. open source, open tests, etc). Anecdo…

History unfolds without anyone at the helm. It just happens, like a pachinko ball falling down the board. Global economic structures will push the development of AI and they're extremely hard to overwhelm.

for better or worse, decisions with great impact are taken by people in power. this view of history as a pachinko ball may numb us to not question the people in power.

Re: AI 2027

#606

Post by roryokane » Sun, Apr 06, 2025, 6:21 AM UTC

Aurornis wrote: post #232

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...

> ACT post where Scott Alexander provides some additional info: https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/introducing-ai-2027 The pattern where Scott Alexander puts forth a huge claim and then immediately hedges it backward is becoming a tiresome theme. The linguistic equivalent of putting claims into a superposition where the author is both owning it and distancing themselves from it at the same time, leaving the writing jus…

> [The Manifold prediction market] only requires 30% of judges to vote YES for it to resolve to YES.

That’s a misreading. If 30% of judges vote YES, then only 30% of the prediction’s market cap is awarded to those who bet YES, while the remaining 70% of the market cap is awarded to those who bet NO. The market correctly rewards those who bet NO in such a case. Therefore, bettors have no reason to bet YES if they really think NO.

Re: AI 2027

#607

Post by FeepingCreature » Sun, Apr 06, 2025, 7:40 AM UTC

meowface wrote: post #585

FeepingCreature wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use the models daily and agree with Scott.

You are an SSCite though and therefore are biased. (That said, I agree with you. But I know I myself am biased to agree with Scott.)

I mean, it's more that I agree with Eliezer... but like, I've used them since GPT-2. I really do think that "this is it", the tech will just keep scaling.

Re: AI 2027

#608

Post by m11a » Sun, Apr 06, 2025, 9:56 AM UTC

akra wrote: post #566

m11a wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that's not what _humanity_ is about I've not spent too long thinking on the following, so I'm prepared for someone to say I'm totally wrong, but: I feel like the services economy can be broadly broken down into: pleasure, progress and chores. Pleasure being poetry/literature, movies, hospitality, etc; progress being the examples you gave like science/engineering, mathematics; and chore being things humans need to c…

I'm not sure where construction and physical work goes into your categories. Process and chores maybe. But I think AI will struggle in the physical domain - validation is difficult and repeated experiments to train on are either too risky, too costly or potentially too damaging (i.e. in the real world failure is often not an option unlike software where test benches can allow controlled failure in a simulated env).

Neither, my categories only cover "services" (at least as Wikipedia would categorise things into this bracket: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_economy).

I agree with you on construction and physical work.

Re: AI 2027

#609

Post by Kinrany » Sun, Apr 06, 2025, 12:50 PM UTC

creatonez wrote: post #338

fire_lake wrote: post #337

If you genuinely believe this, why on earth would you work for OpenAI etc even in safety / alignment? The only response in my view is to ban technology (like in Dune) or engage in acts of terror Unabomber style.

> The only response in my view is to ban technology (like in Dune) or engage in acts of terror Unabomber style. Not far off from the conclusion of others who believe the same wild assumptions. Yudkowsky has suggested using terrorism to stop a hypothetical AGI -- that is, nuclear attacks on datacenters that get too powerful.

That's war, not terrorism

Re: AI 2027

#610

Post by baron816 » Sun, Apr 06, 2025, 2:19 PM UTC

danielbln wrote: post #571

baron816 wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My vision for an ASI future involves humans living in simulations that are optimized for human experience. That doesn’t mean we are just live in a paradise and are happy all the time. We’d experience dread and loss and fear, but it would ultimately lead to a deeply satisfying outcome. And we’d be able to choose to forget things, including whether we’re in a simulation so that it feels completely unmistakeable from ba…

Are you being facetious? Just asking, because this is literally the plot of the Matrix.

I’m serious. The Matrix is a movie made for entertainment. If the plot of The Matrix were “people live in The Matrix and everyone is fine with that and nothing interesting happens”, then it would’ve been an awful movie.

Again, you’re not experiencing a mundane or perfect world. It would be like being in a video game or movie, if you wanted. Some people would experience the plot of The Matrix as any of the characters. Or you could travel around the galaxy solving mysteries and fighting evil as a Jedi Master. Or you could spend some time living a quiet pastoral life in the Shire with your hobbit friends. Or you could do it all over and over again experiencing the highs and lows each time.