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

AI 2027

ai-2027.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 641 posts

Re: AI 2027

#251

Post by senordevnyc »

kody wrote: post #64
lumenwrites wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty good at what I do, at least according to myself and the people I work with, and I'm comparing its capabilities (the latest version of Claude used as an agent inside Cursor) to myself. It can't fully do things on its own and makes mistakes, but it can do a lot. But suppose you're right, it's 60% as good as "stackoverflow copy-pasting programmers". Isn't that a pretty insanely impressive milestone to just di…

I appreciate your reply. My tone was a little dismissive; I'm currently deep deep in the trenches trying to unwind a tremendous amount of LLM slop in my team's codebase so I'm a little sensitive. I use Claude every day. It is definitely impressive, but in my experience only marginally more impressive than ChatGPT was a few years ago. It hallucinates less and compiles more reliably, but still produces really poor desi…

GPT-4 was released almost exactly two years ago, so “a few years ago” means GPT-3.5.

And Claude 3.7 + Cursor agent is, for me, way more than “marginally more impressive” compared to GPT-3.5

Re: AI 2027

#252

Post by adastra22 »

Aurornis wrote: post #210
torginus wrote: post #143

Much has been made in its article about autonomous agents ability to do research via browsing the web - the web is 90% garbage by weight (including articles on certain specialist topics). And it shows. When I used GPT's deep research to research the topic, it generated a shallow and largely incorrect summary of the issue, owning mostly to its inability to find quality material, instead it ended up going for places li…

This story isn’t really about agents browsing the web. It’s a fiction about a company that consumes all of the web and all other written material into a model that doesn’t need to browse the web. The agents in this story supersede the web. But your point hits on one of the first cracks to show in this story: We already have companies consuming much of the web and training models on all of our books, but the reports t…

There's an old adage in AI: garbage in, garbage out. Consuming and training on the whole internet doesn't make you smarter than the average intelligence of the internet.

Re: AI 2027

#253

Post by zmj »

ikerino wrote: post #4

Feels reasonable in the first few paragraphs, then quickly starts reading like science fiction. Would love to read a perspective examining "what is the slowest reasonable pace of development we could expect." This feels to me like the fastest (unreasonable) trajectory we could expect.

If you described today's AI capabilities to someone from 3 years ago, that would also sound like science fiction. Extrapolate.

Re: AI 2027

#254

Post by senordevnyc »

ladberg wrote: post #84
dingnuts wrote: post #73

how am I supposed to take articles like this seriously when they say absolutely false bullshit like this > the AIs can do everything taught by a CS degree no, they fucking can't. not at all. not even close. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. Does anyone really think this? Why have I not seen -any- complete software created via vibe coding yet?

It doesn't claim it's possible now, it's a fictional short story claiming "AIs can do everything taught by a CS degree" by the end of 2026.

Ironically, the models of today can read an article better than some of us.

Re: AI 2027

#255

Post by pydry »

gmoot wrote: post #241
torlok wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't try to reason with this population collapse nonsense. This has always been about racists fearing that "not enough" white westerners are being born, or about industrialists wanting infinite growth. For some prominent technocrats it's both.

The welfare state is predicated on a pyramid-shaped population. Also: people deride infinite growth, but growth is what is responsible for lifting large portions of the population out of poverty. If global markets were repriced tomorrow to expect no future growth, economies would collapse. There may be a way to accept low or no growth without economic collapse, but if there is no one has figured it out yet. That's no…

The welfare state isnt predicated on a pyramid shape but the continued growth of the stock market and endless GDP growth certainly is.

>infinite growth, but growth is what is responsible for lifting large portions of the population out of poverty

It's overstated. The preconditions for GDP growth - namely lack of war and corruption are probably more responsible than the growth itself.

Re: AI 2027

#256

Post by joshdavham »

ivraatiems wrote: post #219

Though I think it is probably mostly science-fiction, this is one of the more chillingly thorough descriptions of potential AGI takeoff scenarios that I've seen. I think part of the problem is that the world you get if you go with the "Slowdown"/somewhat more aligned world is still pretty rough for humans: What's the point of our existence if we have no way to meaningfully contribute to our own world? I hope we're wr…

> I hope we're wrong about a lot of this, and AGI turns out to either be impossible, or much less useful than we think it will be.

For me personally, I hope that we do get AGI. I just don't want it by 2027. That feels way too fast to me. But AGI 2070 or 2100? That sounds much more preferable.

Re: AI 2027

#257

Post by nopinsight »

abraxas wrote: post #229
ivraatiems wrote: post #219

Though I think it is probably mostly science-fiction, this is one of the more chillingly thorough descriptions of potential AGI takeoff scenarios that I've seen. I think part of the problem is that the world you get if you go with the "Slowdown"/somewhat more aligned world is still pretty rough for humans: What's the point of our existence if we have no way to meaningfully contribute to our own world? I hope we're wr…

I think LLM or no LLM the emergence of intelligence appears to be closely related to the number of synapses in a network whether a biological or a digital one. If my hypothesis is roughly true it means we are several orders of magnitude away from AGI. At least the kind of AGI that can be embodied in a fully functional robot with the sensory apparatus that rivals the human body. In order to build circuits of this dens…

If by “several” orders of magnitude, you mean 3-5, then we might be there by 2030 or earlier.

https://situational-awareness.ai/from-gpt-4-to-agi/

Re: AI 2027

#258

Post by HeatrayEnjoyer »

ohgr wrote: post #170
superconduct123 wrote: post #115

Why are the biggest AI predictions always made by people who aren't deep in the tech side of it? Or actually trying to use the models day-to-day...

In the path to self value people explain their worth by what they say not what they know. If what they say is horse dung, it is irrelevant to their ego if there is someone dumber than they are listening. This bullshit article is written for that audience. Say bullshit enough times and people will invest.

So what's the product they're promoting?

Re: AI 2027

#259

Post by Centigonal »

kypro wrote: post #181
KaiserPro wrote: post #151

> AI has started to take jobs, but has also created new ones. Yeah nah, theres a key thing missing here, the number of jobs created needs to be more than the ones it's destroyed, and they need to be better paying and happen in time. History says that actually when this happens, an entire generation is yeeted on to the streets (see powered looms, Jacquard machine, steam powered machine tools) All of that cheap labour…

> and probably revolution I theorise that revolution would be near-impossible in post-AGI world. If people consider where power comes from it's relatively obvious that people will likely suffer and die on mass if we ever create AGI. Historically the general public have held the vast majority of power in society. 100+ years ago this would have been physical power – the state has to keep you happy or the public will co…

I think "resource curse" countries are a great surrogate for studying possible future AGI-induced economic and political phenomena. A country like the UAE (oil) or Botswana (diamonds) essentially has an economic equivalent to AGI: they control a small, extremely productive utility (an oilfield or a mine instead of a server farm), and the wealth generated by that utility is far in excess of what those countries' leaders need to maintain power. Sure, you hire foreign labor and trade for resources instead of having your AGI supply those things, but the end result is the same.

Re: AI 2027

#260

Post by HeatrayEnjoyer »

pixl97 wrote: post #159
achierius wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's obviously not true. Before OpenAI blew the field open, multiple labs -- e.g. Google -- were intentionally holding back their research from the public eye because they thought the world was not ready. Investors were not pouring billions into capabilities. China did not particularly care to focus on this one research area, among many, that the US is still solidly ahead in. The only reason timelines are as short…

The simplicity of the statement "If we don't do it, someone else will." and thinking behind it eventually means someone will do just that unless otherwise prevented by some regulatory function. Simply put, with the ever increasing hardware speeds we were dumping out for other purposes this day would have come sooner than later. We're talking about only a year or two really.

Cloning? Bioweapons? Ever larger nuclear stockpiles? The world has collectively agreed not to do something more than once. AI would be easier to control than any of the above. GPUs can't be dug out of the ground.
Post reply on HN