141–150 of 524 posts
We don't need to live "side by side" with AI. AI is not alive, it's a technology we use. This is like talking about living side by side with your toaster.
But I do live with it. It lives in my kitchen.
AI labs have every incentive to overstate the risks so that they can get lucrative government contracts, especially since it’s clearly not profitable going the public consumer route. And if you’re Anthropic you’re even more incentivised to overstate the risks because at this point in the game regulation hurts potential competitors more than it hurts you.
How far are we from reliable AI? One that could, for example, handle 80% of office jobs without screwing up more than humans?
(it probably did cost jobs, but more the kind that a job like data entry was replaced by OCR)
"Ten years from now, I think we will realize that we were standing in the foothills of the singularity now... I believe that we're only a few years away from [AGI], maybe 2030 plus or minus a year... I think [AGI] will be an enormous transformative technology, it's going to effectively be a new human era... We can feel this year, I would say, even though I've been working towards this for 30 years, I think this year…
Someone should document these cringe comments for posterity. As a warning to future generations. It's too bad the previous singularity cult manias 10 and 15 years ago weren't documented and are lost in time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see driverless cars all the time in San Francisco and I'm eagerly awaiting the regulatory decisions that will allow them to be widely available in the bay area at large.
It's not driverless until you can sleep while it drives.
> Fermi asked why, given the apparent abundance of planets suitable for life, no evidence of other technologically advanced civilisations had been detected. One disquieting possibility is that intelligent life routinely reaches a technological threshold and fails to navigate it, The Fermi paradox could actually also be taken as an evidence that it's rare (at least) for artificial intelligences to take over a civiliza…
The idea that AI takes over, and then just does nothing, would essentially require an AI that wouldn't be interested in taking over in the first place. If x is determined to take y, why would x then stop at z? You'd need an AI that is simultaneously ambitious enough to overthrow its creators but then completely inert afterward, and those two properties contradict each other. The motivations that produce the takeover…
A technosignature that originated from little green men and a technosignature that originated from a rogue alien AI would look about the same to us. Currently, we see neither.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I think AI has eliminated writing code. Everyone I personally know working in software stopped writing code some time between December and March. (It's true that AI continues to routinely make errors; if you've heard the term "agentic workflows", that's the standard strategy for mitigating the error rate by allowing the AI to check its own work.) That's why I think Amodei's January 2026 prediction that AI could…
> Yes, I think AI has eliminated writing code. Then you are dead wrong. Anyone who gives a shit about doing a good job is still writing code.
Literally all HN talks about is AI these days, and it is very, very clear that plenty of people are still writing lots of code, many finding AI makes them slower and causes more problems, and many making the reverse claims. There is always a rich mix of opinions and experiences here.
You would have to believe that literally everyone on HN is a bot (and also everyone on Reddit, Twitter, astralcodexten, or anywhere else online) to discount all these differing opinions in favor of "everyone I personally know" .
Why not, for example, Geoffrey Hinton, the scientist who won the nobel prize for LLM architecture? Or a sci-fi author?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Someone should document these cringe comments for posterity. As a warning to future generations. It's too bad the previous singularity cult manias 10 and 15 years ago weren't documented and are lost in time.
You know in the future they are just going to say it's different this time right?
Why is someone from Planet Labs writing this? Why not, for example, Geoffrey Hinton, the scientist who won the nobel prize for LLM architecture? Or a sci-fi author?