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

How accurate have Ed Zitron's AI skeptic predictions been?

danluu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 1001 posts

Re: How accurate have Ed Zitron's AI skeptic predictions been?

#571

Post by ghostk »

pocksuppet wrote: post #566
layoric wrote: post #563

This critique is leaning really hard on their interpretation of "dying". They take the literal company is going to fail type of dying where as I have always taken it the same way he has presented it in his "rot-economy" context. They can remain financially "successful", but more and more people hate their products, their products are getting worse, their products are "dying". Google Search is still a good example, th…

If I have a billion trillion dollars but 20% of the population hates me, but I get to live in a giant solid gold mansion with an army of servants keeping the 20% away from me, have I really failed?

type shit Louis the XVI would ponder about

Re: How accurate have Ed Zitron's AI skeptic predictions been?

#573

Post by aetherson »

emp17344 wrote: post #378
achompas wrote: post #335

One thing I’m observing in these comments is a willingness of folks to project their own predictions onto Ed’s statements when validating their plausibility. Eg. “I think he’s wrong about the timing but I do expect AI companies to go to zero.” You can do that, but then you’re no longer discussing his predictions. You’re discussing your predictions, and your own positioning. Those differ from Dan’s essay, which engage…

Why is Zitron’s repute evaluated entirely on the basis of failed predictions? Predictions are incredibly hard. AI enthusiasts and thought leaders have made so many demonstrably incorrect predictions it’s hard to keep track. Based on this metric, Altman and Amodei should never be taken seriously again.

What else would his repute be based on? Maybe telling retrospective truth? Per the article, he does terribly by that metric as well.

Re: How accurate have Ed Zitron's AI skeptic predictions been?

#574

Post by Jblx2 »

jibal wrote: post #517
socalgal2 wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to need some evidence that Kurzweil was wrong. AFAICT he was right in 80%+ of his predictions with several more on track.

I'm going to need some evidence that Kurzweil was right in 80%+ of his predictions with several more on track.

I think you missed a "I won't respond further."

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

Re: How accurate have Ed Zitron's AI skeptic predictions been?

#575

Post by jxcole »

layoric wrote: post #563

This critique is leaning really hard on their interpretation of "dying". They take the literal company is going to fail type of dying where as I have always taken it the same way he has presented it in his "rot-economy" context. They can remain financially "successful", but more and more people hate their products, their products are getting worse, their products are "dying". Google Search is still a good example, th…

If many people hated their products, they wouldn't use them. If they didn't use them they would not be financially successful. Google is not dying just because you personally have a feeling the results are worse than before and there is no definition of dying that would be consistent with Google's current state. If Google were to die they would die the way Yahoo did, because a competitor was demonstrably better than them and everyone switched off. There is no realistic evidence that this might occur in the near future.

Re: How accurate have Ed Zitron's AI skeptic predictions been?

#576

Post by oofbey »

layoric wrote: post #563

This critique is leaning really hard on their interpretation of "dying". They take the literal company is going to fail type of dying where as I have always taken it the same way he has presented it in his "rot-economy" context. They can remain financially "successful", but more and more people hate their products, their products are getting worse, their products are "dying". Google Search is still a good example, th…

Was Microsoft dying under Balmer? I think we’d say yes. Even if the SEC filings indicated otherwise.

Re: How accurate have Ed Zitron's AI skeptic predictions been?

#577

Post by kshri24 »

pocksuppet wrote: post #566
layoric wrote: post #563

This critique is leaning really hard on their interpretation of "dying". They take the literal company is going to fail type of dying where as I have always taken it the same way he has presented it in his "rot-economy" context. They can remain financially "successful", but more and more people hate their products, their products are getting worse, their products are "dying". Google Search is still a good example, th…

If I have a billion trillion dollars but 20% of the population hates me, but I get to live in a giant solid gold mansion with an army of servants keeping the 20% away from me, have I really failed?

Still a failure because it is propped up by an inflated US dollar. Those trillions would mean nothing when the US economy collapses due to a cumulative effect of massive national debt, unending wars and inflation.

At least if you have the population by your side, you wouldn't have "guns, gold, potassium iodide, antibiotics, batteries, water, gas masks from the Israeli Defense Force, and a big patch of land in Big Sur I can fly to" [1]

They are all willing to risk everything to see if their bet on achieving "singularity" fructifies. I don't see us getting anywhere close (at least with the current tech).

[1]: https://futurism.com/the-byte/openai-ceo-survivalist-prepper

Re: How accurate have Ed Zitron's AI skeptic predictions been?

#578

Post by raincole »

sfblah wrote: post #99

I don't think Zitron is wrong, exactly. He's just early. There are a lot of analysts who have faced the same criticism over the past 10-15 years. IMO the issue is that they fail to understand the staggering size and scope of the government fiscal + monetary interventions across those years. Essentially, the government has jammed all the risk into the future to repeatedly rescue near-term results. I think something si…

> He's just early

The whole point of making predictions is timing. I can tell you the US dollar will continue to devalue (a 100% accurate prediction). But it's a worthless statement unless I can tell you when and how much.

Re: How accurate have Ed Zitron's AI skeptic predictions been?

#580

Post by supern0va »

misswaterfairy wrote: post #469
tim333 wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Patrick Boyle had a vid specifically on whether there was Enron style fraud. The conclusion was no, though he thinks things may be a bit bubbly https://youtu.be/NufJ7g63KSY

It's worth considering that it might not be 'Enron-style' fraud, because that's the best comparison have at the moment. What event did people compare Enron to, before Enron became 'Enron'? It's probable we're witnessing an entirely new fraud, we just don't have all of the details yet.

Why? If there's no evidence of fraud, why are you imagining some new category of fraud that these companies have independently conjured up?

Suggesting that an entire industry is in cahoots to invent and participate in an entirely new fraud-like scheme, including companies that have lots of wealth and growth and much to lose from such an exposure...seems awfully conspiratorial, don't you think?

Post reply on HN