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

Ilya Sutskever: We're moving from the age of scaling to the age of research

dwarkesh.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 374 posts

Re: Ilya Sutskever: We're moving from the age of scaling to the age of research

#161

Post by stevenhuang »

JimmyBuckets wrote: post #106

I respect Ilya hugely as a researcher in ML and quite admire his overall humility, but I have to say I cringed quite a bit at the start of this interview when he talks about emotions, their relative complexity, and origin. Emotion is so complex, even taking all the systems in the body that it interacts with. And many mammals have very intricate socio-emotional lives - take Orcas or Elephants. There is an arrogance I…

It is not arrogance.

It's awareness of the physical church turing thesis.

If it turns out everything is fundamentally informational, then the exact complexity (of emotion or consciousness even, which I'm sure is very complex) is irrelevant; it would still mean it's turing representable and thus computable.

It may very well turn out not to be the case, which on it's own will be interesting as that suggests we live in a dualist reality.

Re: Ilya Sutskever: We're moving from the age of scaling to the age of research

#163

Post by hn_acc1 »

roman_soldier wrote: post #148

Scaling got us here and it wasn't obvious that it would produce the results we have now, so who's to say sentience won't emerge from scaling another few orders of magnitude? Of course there will always be research to squeeze more out of the compute, improving efficiency and perhaps make breakthroughs.

Another few orders of magnitude? Like 100-1000x more than we're already doing? Got a few extra suns we can tap for energy? And a nanobot army to build various power plants? There's no way to do 1000x of what we're already doing any time soon.

Re: Ilya Sutskever: We're moving from the age of scaling to the age of research

#164

Post by hn_acc1 »

wrs wrote: post #52

"The idea that we’d be investing 1% of GDP in AI, I feel like it would have felt like a bigger deal, whereas right now it just feels...[normal]." Wow. No. Like so many other crazy things that are happening right now, unless you're inside the requisite reality distortion field, I assure you it does not feel normal. It feels like being stuck on Calvin's toboggan, headed for the cliff.

Agreed.

Re: Ilya Sutskever: We're moving from the age of scaling to the age of research

#165

Post by el_jay »

JimmyBuckets wrote: post #106

I respect Ilya hugely as a researcher in ML and quite admire his overall humility, but I have to say I cringed quite a bit at the start of this interview when he talks about emotions, their relative complexity, and origin. Emotion is so complex, even taking all the systems in the body that it interacts with. And many mammals have very intricate socio-emotional lives - take Orcas or Elephants. There is an arrogance I…

ML and physics share a belief in the power of their universal abstractions - all is dynamics in spaces at scales, all is models and data.

The belief is justified because the abstractions work for a big array of problems, to a number of decimal places. Get good enough at solving problems with those universal abstractions, everything starts to look like a solvable problem and it gets easy to lose epistemic humility.

You can combine physics and ML to make large reusable orbital rockets that land themselves. Why shouldn’t be able to solve any of the sometimes much tamer-looking problems they fail to? Even today there was an IEEE article about high failure rates in IT projects…

Re: Ilya Sutskever: We're moving from the age of scaling to the age of research

#166

Post by mips_avatar »

JimmyBuckets wrote: post #106

I respect Ilya hugely as a researcher in ML and quite admire his overall humility, but I have to say I cringed quite a bit at the start of this interview when he talks about emotions, their relative complexity, and origin. Emotion is so complex, even taking all the systems in the body that it interacts with. And many mammals have very intricate socio-emotional lives - take Orcas or Elephants. There is an arrogance I…

I think the bigger problem is he refused to talk about what he's working on! I would love to hear his view on how we're going to move past evals and RL, but he flat out said it's proprietary and won't talk about it.

Re: Ilya Sutskever: We're moving from the age of scaling to the age of research

#167

Post by rafaelero »

JimmyBuckets wrote: post #106

I respect Ilya hugely as a researcher in ML and quite admire his overall humility, but I have to say I cringed quite a bit at the start of this interview when he talks about emotions, their relative complexity, and origin. Emotion is so complex, even taking all the systems in the body that it interacts with. And many mammals have very intricate socio-emotional lives - take Orcas or Elephants. There is an arrogance I…

The equivalence of emotions to reward functions seem pretty obvious to me. Emotions are what compel us to act in the environment.

Re: Ilya Sutskever: We're moving from the age of scaling to the age of research

#168

Post by techblueberry »

pxc wrote: post #155

If "Era of Scaling" means "era of rapid and predictable performance improvements that easily attract investors", it sounds a lot like "AI summer". So... is "Era of Research" a euphemism for "AI winter"?

Yes

Re: Ilya Sutskever: We're moving from the age of scaling to the age of research

#169

Post by mips_avatar »

fumeux_fume wrote: post #114
JimmyBuckets wrote: post #106

I respect Ilya hugely as a researcher in ML and quite admire his overall humility, but I have to say I cringed quite a bit at the start of this interview when he talks about emotions, their relative complexity, and origin. Emotion is so complex, even taking all the systems in the body that it interacts with. And many mammals have very intricate socio-emotional lives - take Orcas or Elephants. There is an arrogance I…

Yeah, that's bothered me as well. Andrej Karpathy does this all the time when he talks about the human brain and making analogies to LLMs. He makes speculative statements about how the human brain works as though it's established fact.

Andrej does use biological examples, but he's a lot more cautious about biomimicry, and often uses biological examples to show why AI and bio are different. Like he doesn't believe that animals use classical RL because a baby horse can walk after 5 minutes which definitely wasn't achieved through classical RL. He doesn't pretend to know how a horse developed that ability, just that it's not classical RL.

A lot of Ilya's takes in this interview felt like more of a stretch. The emotions and LLM argument felt like of like "let's add feathers to planes because birds fly and have feathers". I bet continual learning is going to have some kind of internal goal beyond RL eval functions, but these speculations about emotions just feel like college dorm discussions.

The thing that made Ilya such an innovator (the elegant focus on next token prediction) was so simple, and I feel like his next big take is going to be something about neuron architecture (something he eluded to in the interview but flat out refused to talk about).

Re: Ilya Sutskever: We're moving from the age of scaling to the age of research

#170

Post by an0malous »

Herring wrote: post #30

https://metr.org/blog/2025-03-19-measuring-ai-ability-to-com... He’s wrong we still scaling, boys.

“Time it takes for a human to complete a task that AI can complete 50% of the time” seems like a really contrived metric. Suppose it takes 30 minutes to write code to scrape a page and also 30 minutes to identify a bug in a SQL query, an AI’s ability to solve the former has virtually no bearing on its ability to solve the latter but we’re considering them all in the same set of “30 minute problems.” Where do they get the data for task durations anyway?
Post reply on HN