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

For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

erkansaka.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 190 posts

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#181

Post by ahf8Aithaex7Nai »

Gregkion wrote: post #173
ahf8Aithaex7Nai wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just because you list up some type of random technology, doesn't make it an good argument. In what way is this random? It's a chronology of the bullshit from the past few years. Also: easy to say in hindsight. The hype was there, and many people believed it. The press, in particular, just lapped up the claims the way a Labrador Retriever gobbles up whatever you put in front of it. > We have opened up a potential pa…

I never followed these hypes and it was very clear very fast that this stuff was bullshit. Did I see that I could get rich with bitcoins investing until 100k and selling everything? For sure not. But i already saw basic flaws of crypto when it came out. Hyperloop? I cried out very early on how dangeriuos this is and how stupid and that no one wants to ride in a small tube without proper precautions (i was wrong here,…

I don't think these are the smartest people in the world. Yes, they're investing 1% to 2% of global GDP. My conclusion from this is that things are going to get pretty rough when the bubble bursts. I see what LLMs are capable of every day at work. Yes, it's impressive. But I also hear how the Silicon Valley bullshitters talk about it—and it just doesn't add up. You're welcome to see great rationality in the fact that they're all pouring all their capital into it. I see great irrationality there instead. Don't assume I'm not familiar with the subject just because I don't share your assessment.

Edit:

A quote from this discussion:

> I'm worried about what happens when an AI or a coalition of AIs starts optimizing reality instead of just optimizing chess boards.

That's the intellectual and analytical level at which fears about AI play out. And that's exactly the level at which the bullshitters stoke those fears. And you want me to take that seriously? Sorry, but that's ridiculous!

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#182

Post by carodgers »

Gregkion wrote: post #169
carodgers wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"And an LLM can easily, today, just rebuild a chess engine and beat whatever they need to beat." Always claims and promises about what they "can" do. This pattern is constant across AI hype. No one can prove that an LLM will forever fail to solve problem X, so the claim goes uncontested, and humans are biased to believe unrebutted claims. I reject this fallacious line of reasoning. I will instead require evidence of…

An LLM converted a random game for me into rust. I have watched YouTube Videos of trusted people and in them the LLM reads a paper and implements the simulation result of the paper. Yesterday a LLM deciphyered an old text. LLMs helped to solve a millenium problem. Give an LLM access to proper compute and it will beat most people on the planet. Do you really think if you would get unlimited tokens and a compute cluste…

"Do you really think if you would get unlimited tokens and a compute cluster that something like a fable or astra frontier model setup couldn't build a better chess engine?"

Disconnect it from the internet, where it cannot copy from humans, and no, it certainly will not. If it can copy code from humans, then maybe, with guidance. But if a human is not there to offer guidance, no, I don't think it will improve on stockfish.

Worse, if it cannot copy code from humans, it will fail embarrassingly at playing chess on its own. This April 2026 paper found that frontier models which did not have specialized (human guided) tailoring could not beat an amateur-level bot (1100 ELO), and some were so bad they lost to random play.

https://arxiv.org/html/2509.24239v4

Look at the MAR rates in table 3. When not explicitly provided with a choice of legal moves, no bot could ask for legal moves at a rate better than 80%. Many of them asked for more illegal moves than legal moves. All of them continued to request illegal moves even when explicitly asked to choose from legal moves. That's not just less than perfect. That's abysmal.

So, recapping, if the most advanced bots on the planet, in April 2026, are not allowed to copy code written by humans, and are forced to play chess by themselves, they will embarrass themselves. And you and others are asking me to believe they are a threat to me somehow. That kind of talk is disconnected from reality.

What is common with all of the "impressive" examples you gave me? The bot had material to copy from, or a human standing nearby to tell it when it screwed up and suggest a path forward. They are not intelligent. They're so stupid, in fact, I could not trust them to balance my checkbook without knowing guard rails are in place. So spare me the hysterics.

"When do you draw the line of LLM is just some stupid thing vs. AI/AGI?" I'm not sure, but I do know the line is well beyond playing a game of chess without requesting illegal moves 20% of the time. There are 5-year-olds who can do that.

You need to ask yourself some hard questions.

1) Why have I been conditioned to expect that given enough compute, a bot can build anything, unguided?

2) Why have the embarrassing details about bot performance been hidden from me, or at least drowned out by hysterical claims about their wild successes? Why is the human role in these successes never highlighted?

3) What do the people training these bots stand to gain if they convince 51% of the voting population that bots are actually a meaningful threat?

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#183

Post by Gregkion »

ahf8Aithaex7Nai wrote: post #181
Gregkion wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never followed these hypes and it was very clear very fast that this stuff was bullshit. Did I see that I could get rich with bitcoins investing until 100k and selling everything? For sure not. But i already saw basic flaws of crypto when it came out. Hyperloop? I cried out very early on how dangeriuos this is and how stupid and that no one wants to ride in a small tube without proper precautions (i was wrong here,…

I don't think these are the smartest people in the world. Yes, they're investing 1% to 2% of global GDP. My conclusion from this is that things are going to get pretty rough when the bubble bursts. I see what LLMs are capable of every day at work. Yes, it's impressive. But I also hear how the Silicon Valley bullshitters talk about it—and it just doesn't add up. You're welcome to see great rationality in the fact that…

Im open to have a discussion on what your points are if you are familiary with ml in depth. I shared a bit from me.

And I didn't meant Sam Altman or Dario with the smartest people. I meant the professors who threw their tenure out and went back to the industry, top researchers, mathematitions, nobelarians.

And besides Altman and Daris, Demis, Fei-Fei Li, Lecun, Ilya Sutskever are very well known and are very smart.

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#184

Post by Gregkion »

carodgers wrote: post #178
Gregkion wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are an american taxpayer, you should be happy. The AI investment from all these companies are good for you as a taxpayer. You do understand that the USA would be in a recession without AI right? And that these billions of invest are driipling down into your economy right?

I am happy. AI is great. I use it. I'm glad that the U.S. is building datacenters. I work for a company involved in siting and building datacenters. But AI is not as scary or dangerous as Dario claims.

Its a mix probably between a new potential and the progress.

Taking it seriuos and then figuring out its not that dangerious is probably a 1000 times better than the opposite.

And the last Ubuntu LTS patch had the most CVEs fixed i ever seen. After Snowden, you can assume a lot more of what i thought would be 'tin foil hat' might just have happened like a massive exploit scheme of CVEs.

Or things like Stuxnet.

You always had to be an expert somehow, now you can throw compute at it. Just imagine a USA, China, russian or israely hackergroup having their uncensored models running in secret datacenters with very basic prompts because they don't care.

It would be weird tbh if state actors/hackers aren't doing that yet which already shows us one big problem with ai:

AI is technology you have to use now and you have to invest. If you are not, someone else will break into your systems.

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#185

Post by Gregkion »

carodgers wrote: post #182
Gregkion wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An LLM converted a random game for me into rust. I have watched YouTube Videos of trusted people and in them the LLM reads a paper and implements the simulation result of the paper. Yesterday a LLM deciphyered an old text. LLMs helped to solve a millenium problem. Give an LLM access to proper compute and it will beat most people on the planet. Do you really think if you would get unlimited tokens and a compute cluste…

"Do you really think if you would get unlimited tokens and a compute cluster that something like a fable or astra frontier model setup couldn't build a better chess engine?" Disconnect it from the internet, where it cannot copy from humans, and no, it certainly will not. If it can copy code from humans, then maybe, with guidance. But if a human is not there to offer guidance, no, I don't think it will improve on stoc…

They will probably just rebuild AlphaZero with autoresearch and iterate over it.

Chess is not an interesting target for AI Research and not for AGI. Your checkbook doesn't get balanced just beause Magnus Carlsen is doing it for you. You probably don't want him to balance your books i assume.

1. I have not been conditioned, i just understand what it means if you have a lot of compute available to you. Autoresearch becomes feasable, doing a million experiments becomes feasable

2. never? Thats just not true? But yes AI/compute is a significiant part, even with the Navier–Stokes topic: Tristan Buckmaster and Levent Alpoege said that AI helped them

3. I'm not training these bots and see big issues for society. The most basic ones: Our company spends now millions on AI Tokens and i wouldn't wanna go back. AI helps me to analyse things faster, debug things faster, write code faster etc. and it only gets better. But what does it mean if your devs are now 5-10% more expensive? A reduction of workforce and reduction in budget for consultans.

This is real impact and there are A LOT easier jobs out there on a computer than software development.

Normally technology starts with the most expensive stuff first, we automated away a lot of these things, with AI you start at the bottom. This has significant impact on a lot of normal people. Blender support just got so much better, this will affect a lot of basic blender developers.

And this will continue.

Not having jobs for people in a capatilstic world is not good for society if you dont have an answer for this.

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#186

Post by sailfast »

LogicFailsMe wrote: post #99
sailfast wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever lived through a power outage longer than 48 hours? Did you see what it did to people in your neighborhood? That’s the path.

2 weeks, yes. Kids these days... But today, we have ecoflows and solar panels. Back then, we didn't.

Not a kid - I wish. My point was that (admittedly some not all) societies if faced with a loss of a major utility and supply chains that were dependent on would start to devolve pretty quickly into chaos.

That to me is the greater threat than annihilation due to autonomous weapons, etc.

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#187

Post by carodgers »

Gregkion wrote: post #185
carodgers wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Do you really think if you would get unlimited tokens and a compute cluster that something like a fable or astra frontier model setup couldn't build a better chess engine?" Disconnect it from the internet, where it cannot copy from humans, and no, it certainly will not. If it can copy code from humans, then maybe, with guidance. But if a human is not there to offer guidance, no, I don't think it will improve on stoc…

They will probably just rebuild AlphaZero with autoresearch and iterate over it. Chess is not an interesting target for AI Research and not for AGI. Your checkbook doesn't get balanced just beause Magnus Carlsen is doing it for you. You probably don't want him to balance your books i assume. 1. I have not been conditioned, i just understand what it means if you have a lot of compute available to you. Autoresearch bec…

"Chess is not an interesting target for AI Research and not for AGI."

I don't care if it's interesting or not. A bot too stupid to play chess is too stupid to be a threat to me. So I reject Dario's fearmongering and that of anyone allied with him.

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#188

Post by Gregkion »

carodgers wrote: post #187
Gregkion wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They will probably just rebuild AlphaZero with autoresearch and iterate over it. Chess is not an interesting target for AI Research and not for AGI. Your checkbook doesn't get balanced just beause Magnus Carlsen is doing it for you. You probably don't want him to balance your books i assume. 1. I have not been conditioned, i just understand what it means if you have a lot of compute available to you. Autoresearch bec…

"Chess is not an interesting target for AI Research and not for AGI." I don't care if it's interesting or not. A bot too stupid to play chess is too stupid to be a threat to me. So I reject Dario's fearmongering and that of anyone allied with him.

It can play chess, it just can't play it on a master level.

The same with humans.

Your point/argument is very weird very non relatable.

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#189

Post by carodgers »

Gregkion wrote: post #188
carodgers wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Chess is not an interesting target for AI Research and not for AGI." I don't care if it's interesting or not. A bot too stupid to play chess is too stupid to be a threat to me. So I reject Dario's fearmongering and that of anyone allied with him.

It can play chess, it just can't play it on a master level. The same with humans. Your point/argument is very weird very non relatable.

"It just can't play it on a master level."

Technically correct. Losing to random play is definitely not master level.

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#190

Post by jackb4040 »

aidenn0 wrote: post #177
reaperducer wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read the article. I did, thanks. I don't need you to tell me to do that. The common thread is that they both see AI as a threat. It's a different threat to each side, but still a threat. Just because they see different threats from AI doesn't mean that AI isn't a threat. If one person wants to paint the house red and another person wants to paint the house blue doesn't mean the house doesn't need to be painted.

Thinking AI is an existential threat to humanity because it will take over the world and thinking AI is a non-existential threat because it makes disinformation and hacking easier are not even remotely the same thing. It's about as much of a common thread as comparing Shohei Ohtani to a loan-shark's enforcer because they both swing bats at things.

Lol

I love the metaphor, but it's a bit limited because the fake and real "threat" categories aren't just unrelated, they are opposites. The fake ones are all the AI boosters talk about, the real ones they would never talk about. The fake ones pump their stock price, whereas the real ones undermine it.

Post reply on HN