Live data from Hacker News

When AI Builds Itself: Our progress toward recursive self-improvement

anthropic.com

161–170 of 738 posts

Re: When AI Builds Itself: Our progress toward recursive self-improvement

#161

Do code harnesses that build themselves count as recursive self improvement, or does it need to be the AI itself to qualify for the term? I always was fascinated (obsessed?) by robots that build robots, or even things like this that can contribute a lot to making the next version of itself: https://buildyourcnc.com/products/cnc-machine-blacktoe-v4-2x... (cnc router that cuts plywood, and is made out of cnc-router cut…

> Do code harnesses that build themselves count as recursive self improvement, or does it need to be the AI itself to qualify for the term?

Shhh just let the marketing slop wash over you.

Re: When AI Builds Itself: Our progress toward recursive self-improvement

#162
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there will be a lot of paper clips

Often repeated meme doesn’t have any bearing to reality. The orthogonality thesis sounds like a fun gotcha but if you give it some thought you realise how strange it sounds and the opposite thesis - collinearity thesis is actually correct. 1. Intelligence transfers and compounds 2. Goals of agents are not arbitrary 3. Our goals and agent goals are more likely to be aligned at the deeper level

When primate family produced a super-primate intelligence it sure aligned with the good of all of them.

Re: When AI Builds Itself: Our progress toward recursive self-improvement

#163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry for nitpicking, but: > If nukes were not invented yet, would it really be a good idea to build and sell them as fast as possible (in peace time, no less)? Arguably, yes.

Is the idea to keep the world in balance via MAD? I could see that, though it's a dangerous gamble. From Richard Rhode's "The Making of the Atomic Bomb", I got the impression that most scientists involved thought they could manage a US or UN monopoly on nukes after the war. General Groves attempted to buy up all of the world's uranium ore. Unfortunately, it is only high grade ore that is rare; many countries have low…

Wouldn't deliberately going from a world without nuclear weapons to a world with MAD involve giving the tech to build nukes to your worst enemy?

If only the US or UN had nukes we would't have MAD. We mostly got here through espionage

Re: When AI Builds Itself: Our progress toward recursive self-improvement

#164
> "A caveat: Lines of code is an imperfect measure"

I'm pleased they at least included this. However, they address the caveat by 'rounding down' the estimated multiple of the gain. I'm not sure that is the correct adjustment, especially once we understand the range isn't limited to positive numbers.

There's strong evidence the range of code productivity denominated in "lines of code" should include negative numbers, especially in the highest-quality sphere. Perhaps the earliest and most legendary example: https://www.folklore.org/Negative_2000_Lines_Of_Code.html

Re: When AI Builds Itself: Our progress toward recursive self-improvement

#165

I find any and all claims like this ridiculous from a company who can't build a terminal application that uses less than a gigabyte of RAM.

Really? Let me explain how bigger companies work:

They have different teams for different departments with different type of people.

So the team or teams responsible for writing the terminal application are different people than the researchers doing the learning.

This can lead to dimentral quality aspects.

Re: When AI Builds Itself: Our progress toward recursive self-improvement

#166
post #88
post #40

Okay, so anthropic has amazing AI which supposedly writes most of their code and can continuously improve... meanwhile they have outages on a regular basis, and any kind of long-running work will now consistently hit 'API Error: Server is temporarily limiting requests'. Not sure of this is intentional to force a reduction of token usage, but at this point I need to build around these throttling limits and outages wit…

Infrastructure is a much harder problem. They can't even improve Claude Code, which eats 1GB+ of RAM. Meanwhile, my editor only consumes 80MB of RAM.

I dont think they need to optimize their infrastructure (at least not from their perspective). They have high-end PCs with 64GB of RAM, so 1GB doesn't matter to them. For example, I have 8GB of RAM, and I make my apps very performant. Honestly, I probably wouldn't bother if I had 16GB+ of RAM

Re: When AI Builds Itself: Our progress toward recursive self-improvement

#168

I fail to see how pursuing recursive self-improvement at full speed is compatible with Anthropic's stated goal of AI Safety. If nukes were not invented yet, would it really be a good idea to build and sell them as fast as possible (in peace time, no less)? I am not cynical enough to believe that Anthropic's warnings are pure marketing hype. Let's hope that it is instead overconfidence or the result of too much time t…

> I am not cynical enough to believe that Anthropic's warnings are pure marketing hype.

It's not cynicism if it's an appraisal of reality that's backed up by evidence.

Remember how social media - that first baby of this current generation of tech entrepreneurs - was supposed to "bring the world together" and "let us express ourselves"? As it turns out there's a lot more money to be made by fostering division to drive engagement and feeding people an endless stream of ads instead of their friends' content. And money is what matters. You can't write down good vibes on a quarterly figures report. You can absolutely write down the number of eyes that your ragebait brought to a product's marketing efforts and the conversion rate to sales.

The same will be done with GenAI. We're being promised "AI Safety" because otherwise this whole thing gets killed dead by anyone who knows about James Cameron's directing career. There's no real enforcement mechanism for AI safety, though. Safety is a good vibe, same as harmony in online communities. You can't measure it. What you can measure is training costs and the cost of mistakes by AI that need to be trained to avoid those mistakes. Since AI generates more output than humans can conceivably QA no matter what your budget is, and since AI is seen by the market as a potential endless font of value, the tradeoff will be made to have AI make some potentially awful decisions while training itself over slowing down and re-appraising what is being done.

There's an almost religious reverence for AI in SV. Not everyone sees it as "making the godhead" but some certainly do. They're not going to moderate themselves too much on this.

Re: When AI Builds Itself: Our progress toward recursive self-improvement

#169

> "A caveat: Lines of code is an imperfect measure" I'm pleased they at least included this. However, they address the caveat by 'rounding down' the estimated multiple of the gain. I'm not sure that is the correct adjustment, especially once we understand the range isn't limited to positive numbers. There's strong evidence the range of code productivity denominated in "lines of code" should include negative numbers,…

Lmao I bloody love that.

Re: When AI Builds Itself: Our progress toward recursive self-improvement

#170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their outages are probably not due to their code though. It’s probably their infrastructure that can’t keep up. So seeing failures of infrastructure doesn’t really tell you anything about how good or bad Anthropic makes use of their models.

The messed up scrolling behavior I keep getting in Claude Code is definitely due to their code.

There is a setting that fixes this, I can't remember what it's called off the top of my head
Post reply on HN