271–280 of 524 posts
We don't need to live "side by side" with AI. AI is not alive, it's a technology we use. This is like talking about living side by side with your toaster.
"Ten years from now, I think we will realize that we were standing in the foothills of the singularity now... I believe that we're only a few years away from [AGI], maybe 2030 plus or minus a year... I think [AGI] will be an enormous transformative technology, it's going to effectively be a new human era... We can feel this year, I would say, even though I've been working towards this for 30 years, I think this year…
Someone should document these cringe comments for posterity. As a warning to future generations. It's too bad the previous singularity cult manias 10 and 15 years ago weren't documented and are lost in time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the 2nd link I posted: > Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, who once claimed AI could eliminate 50% of white-collar jobs, now says automation may actually expand the work people do. Is pivoting from 50% elimination to actually expanding work not a drastic enough? Do you think AI has eliminated writing code? I still write code every day. The AI is more a thing I ask questions and it gives me right answers about 40% of t…
YOU still write code. I would say over 65-70% of modern programmers no longer write code. The paradigm shift happened within the last 365 days.
There's nothing that I can't tell Claude Opus or GPT 5.5 to do for me instead.
At work, where I don't have cheap AI subscriptions, access to the SOTA, and where code needs to follow conventions more strictly, I still have to write the code by hand often.
How far are we from reliable AI? One that could, for example, handle 80% of office jobs without screwing up more than humans?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It comes down to "what stays the same when all its atoms are replaced" and "how can we tell it is the same entity and not just an identical but different one". I think the answers are "shape" AND "continuity". E.g. all "atoms" of a glider in Conway's Life get replaced every couple turns but an observer can tell it is still a glider because it keeps the shape, and it the same glider because it continues it's previous…
What does a glider have that a continuously running claw lacks?
Why should we assume AI can rapidly turn into super intelligence when physical and critical resources like energy and materials remain under human control?
The first time an AI goes rogue, figures out subterfuge, blackmails a human to do its real-world bidding, will be a defining moment.
There are troves of leaked data out there. It's just a matter of (short) time until someone puts their AI brutes on it.
Like my grandfather used to say "They let anyone on TV now", They let anyone be called an expert now. Love talking about 'recursive self-improvement' of a prediction engine. What about 'recursive self-degradation'?
The most common sense way will always need to have humans in the loop, because humans are being used as judges.
If you try and entertain the idea of a human-less loop, I landed up with something like an AI creating real world products, selling them, then tracking the usage and popularity of the product. Essentially, creating and launching a firm and product, only to update its weights?
Perhaps there are some subsets of tasks that can be regressively self improved - and for those tasks: Holy hell thats awesome!
For general tasks? How are you going to get that data validated?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Things in the real world often take longer than expected. Still, in cities where Waymo operates, many people routinely ride autonomous vehicles and prefer them. For software, however, a rapid turn is often a possibility. See: AI for coding over the last 3-4 years. AI autocomplete --> AI coding assistants --> vibe coding --> agent orchestration Coders can now accomplish work that used to take a week or longer in a cou…
> Things in the real world often take longer than expected. Still, in cities where Waymo operates, many people routinely ride autonomous vehicles and prefer them. Yes. The bottleneck has been getting the cars manufactured. It takes a certain amount of time to get a factory going, and then the product starts pouring out. Waymo used up the supply of Jaguars, about 3,500 of them. The Ioniq 5 plant is starting up.[1] Way…
Why should we assume AI can rapidly turn into super intelligence when physical and critical resources like energy and materials remain under human control?
The first time an AI goes rogue, figures out subterfuge, blackmails a human to do its real-world bidding, will be a defining moment.
But that doesn't make any particular AI controlled process all-powerful. Self improvement doesn't do that either. There will be many self improving AI processes playing many different roles pursuing many different goals.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This was their prediction for 2026: "The bet of using AI to speed up AI research is starting to pay off. OpenBrain continues to deploy the iteratively improving Agent-1 internally for AI R&D. Overall, they are making algorithmic progress 50% faster than they would without AI assistants—and more importantly, faster than their competitors. The AI R&D progress multiplier: what do we mean by 50% faster algorithmic progre…
So you think Anthropic is using internal AI assistants to pull away from competitors and the leapfrogging we've seen over the last several years is now done? That seems to me to be the most concrete and least obvious prediction in the quoted text. I don't think that's happening. If that were generally accepted as true I would expect OpenAI to be unable to successfully IPO.