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

671–680 of 1001 posts

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

#671

Post by dannersy »

Denzel wrote: post #384
inferniac wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, hes been extremely wrong multiple times, he should not be treated seriously Its silly to say hes just early, when his predictions give specific timelines that don't work at all - "so egregious that I am surprised it's not some kind of financial crime to say it out loud" — on OpenAI forecasting $11.6B for 2025 ( https://www.wheresyoured.at/exclusive-openai-financials/ ) actual: $13.07B. source is his own scoop ( h…

The actual quote and topic is far different than you’ve portrayed it. Here’s the actual quote: “ yet the company says that it expects to make $11.6 billion in 2025 and *$100 billion by 2029*, a statement so egregious that I am surprised it's not some kind of financial crime to say it out loud.” from https://www.wheresyoured.at/oai-business/ He goes on to specifically discuss how unrealistic $100B by 2029 is given tha…

This is another case of missing the forest for the trees. In the scope of what Zitron is talking about, the difference of >$2 billion of revenue doesn't make a difference of his overall point of it not being close to enough to cover their spending.

I follow Zitron but the way he talks has been grating and it is even more obvious how biased he is when he has guests on. As if he's trying to lead them into agreeing with his more extreme claims.

That being said, why does this blogger get a pass at this criticism of just being blanket "wrong" when the point of the quote is still very much valid in context? It seems to be the same in the next article, quoted from Ed's blog with the same point. Is this more evidence of being "wrong" or did he correct a previously wrong value and came to the same conclusion (which seems reasonable to me in context)?

It seems like this blogger is guilty of the same criticisms he has against Zitron. They seem eager to find where Zitron is wrong, exaggerating the value of when he misses the mark and without looking at big picture. Then they make sensationalist claims based on those findings.

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

#672

Post by devhunt-org »

layoric wrote: post #562

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…

[dead]

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

#673

Post by sdenton4 »

fulafel wrote: post #622
emp17344 wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I thought in the post Ed was being evaluated based on all his predictions, and it turned out all of them were wrong. Most people will read the post as going over all the falsifiable predictions and none of them panning out, since after the chronological prediction list it says "After this point, most further predictions that I saw were either non-falsifiable or resolve in the future". If Dan is reading maybe he can c…

The list is chronological; as it nears the present, the predictions actually refer to the future, and are thus not yet resolved.

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

#674

Post by ChickeNES »

3RTB297 wrote: post #587
mvdtnz wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever listened to Zitron speak? He's not exactly the type to hedge his predictions behind careful language about how hard predictions are. He makes every one of these predictions with absolute confidence and conviction.

He speaks with all the conviction of a classic "Fire and Brimstone" preacher. Someone for whom the only metric is stirring emotion, not accuracy of statement.

So...Ellsworth Toohey?

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

#675

Post by mppm »

I have stopped reading Ed Zitron quite a while ago because of his long-winded and polemic style. But counting his failed predictions is maybe not that useful, in the sense that his core thesis is really just the AI Bubble. While it hasn't burst, all of his predictions remain wrong; when (if) it does, he'll have been right. Trying to guess the exact time or failure mode (whether it's open models or corporate sticker shock or a bond crisis) is a fool's errand when there are so many powerful actors all-in on keeping up appearances. Exposing the financial and corporate shenanigans of the AI world is nonetheless useful. I just wish someone would do it in a more level-headed way.

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

#676

Post by akoboldfrying »

emp17344 wrote: post #429
mvdtnz wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever listened to Zitron speak? He's not exactly the type to hedge his predictions behind careful language about how hard predictions are. He makes every one of these predictions with absolute confidence and conviction.

So does everyone else, including prominent AI enthusiasts and tech CEOs. And most of those predictions are wrong, because predictions are really hard.

The difference is that Altman and Amodei are doing something else besides making predictions that turn out to be wrong. Most obviously, they're running tech companies that are changing the way entire industries operate. We put a lot of weight on that in evaluating them.

What else is Zitron doing that he could be evaluated on, besides making predictions that turn out to be wrong?

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

#677

Post by amoss »

customguy wrote: post #660
Zetaphor wrote: post #618

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're the ones who are dying. Gen Z grew up on the cloud

What does "the cloud" have to do with anything in this context? That is so utterly orthogonal to how good a UI/UX is.

Cloud services expose their UI/UX through a web-browser will all of the pain points of running a stateful blob of javascript on the client, talking through a mostly stateless protocol to a "mess of stuff" that aims for eventual consistency in the backend.

The old folks, who are retired and dying according to this thread, mostly grew up using local applications with direct control between UI/UX and action.

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

#678

Post by tkel »

autaut wrote: post #538

I’m not really convinced by any of this, in fact it seems most of the predictions were pretty correct and that Meta and Alphabet are having big issues is a shared opinion by multiple observers and pretty much every employee they have. If they were doing so well why the layoffs? Why the tightening both in salaries and perks and work life balance? Why so many choices disrupting morale for their employees?

Yeah, the three tables just looking at revenue and profit YoY is pretty laughable financial analysis.

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

#679

Post by amoss »

pocksuppet wrote: post #565
layoric wrote: post #562

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?

You should let them eat cake.

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

#680

Post by ChickeNES »

minimaxir wrote: post #269
hypfer wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reads slightly weird and more like a pledge of alignment than a statement from the heart. But apart from that, I guess that's always the learning? Journalists (or people labeling themselves as such) often have their own story they want to tell, and usually do so by building it out of little blocks of reality stacked together to form the desired picture. I would predict a similarly frustrating experience being eq…

That's an unfair characterization of tech journalists in general. When BuzzFeed News was around, I worked closely with them on technical aspects and projects to ensure that everything was correct and accurate, and there were very receptive to it; it was not a "directionally correct" thing, the journalists wanted to avoid any unintentional. That was also one of the reasons I was open-minded to helping Ed even though w…

> back when he was writing guest editorials on Gizmodo about Person of Interest (which is very very funny in hindsight)

Sometimes life has a sense of humor

Post reply on HN