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

341–350 of 641 posts

Re: AI 2027

#341

Post by lucianbr »

sofixa wrote: post #332
nroets wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fail to see how corporations are responsible for the climate crisis: Politicians won't tax gas because they'll get voted out. We know that Trump is not captured by corporations because his trade policies are terrible. If anything, social media is the evil that's destroying the political center: Americans are no longer reading mainstream newspapers or watching mainstream TV news. The EU is saying the elections in Ro…

> Politicians won't tax gas because they'll get voted out. Have you seen gas tax rates in the EU? > We know that Trump is not captured by corporations because his trade policies are terrible. Unless you think it's a long con for some rich people to be able to time the market by getting him to crash it. > The EU is saying the elections in Romania was manipulated through manipulation of TikTok accounts and media. More…

Romainan courts say all kinds of things, many of them patently false. It's absurd to claim that since romanian courts say something, it must be true. It's absurd in principle, because there's nothing in the concept of a court that makes it infallible, and it's absurd in this precise case, because we are corrupt as hell.

I'm pretty sure the election was manipulated, but the court only said so because it benefits the incumbents, which control the courts and would lose their power.

It's a struggle between local thieves and putin, that's all. The local thieves will keep us in the EU, which is much better than the alternative, but come on. "More importantly, Romanian courts say so"? Really?

Re: AI 2027

#342

Post by Jensson »

abraxas wrote: post #264
UltraSane wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't the compute be remote from the robot? That is a major advantage of human technology over biology.

Mostly latency. But even if a single robot could be driven by a data centre consider the energy and hardware investment requirements to make such a creature practical.

1ms latency is more than fast enough, you probably have bigger latency than that between the cpu and the gpu.

Re: AI 2027

#344

Post by lm28469 »

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…

> 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?

We spend the best 40 years of our lives working 40-50 hours a week to enrich the top 0.1% while living in completely artificial cities. People should wonder what is the point of our current system instead of worrying about Terminator tier sci fi system that may or may not come sometimes in the next 5 to 200 years

Re: AI 2027

#346

Post by scotty79 »

I think the idea of AI wiping out humanity suddenly is a bit far fetched. AI will have total control of human relationships and fertility through means so innocuous as entertainment. It won't have to wipe us. It will have minor trouble keeping us alive without inconveniencing us too much. And the reason to keep humanity alive is that biologically eveloved intelligence is rare and disposing of it without very important need would be a waste of data.

Re: AI 2027

#347

Post by drchaos »

adastra22 wrote: post #252
Aurornis wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Consuming and training on the whole internet doesn't make you smarter than the average intelligence of the internet.

This is only true as long as you are not able to weigh the quality of a source. Just like getting spam in your inbox may waste your time, but it doesn't make you dumber.

Re: AI 2027

#348

Post by indigoabstract »

Interesting, but I'm puzzled.

If these guys are smart enough to predict the future, wouldn't it be more profitable for them to invent it instead of just telling the world what's going to happen?

Re: AI 2027

#349

Post by arisAlexis »

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…

do you really think that AGI is impossible after all that happened up to today? how is this possible?

Re: AI 2027

#350

Post by movpasd »

danpalmer wrote: post #185
IshKebab wrote: post #31

This is hilariously over-optimistic on the timescales. Like on this timeline we'll have a Mars colony in 10 years, immortality drugs in 15 and Half Life 3 in 20.

These timelines always assume that things progress as quickly as they can be conceived of, likely because these timelines come from "Ideas Guys" whose involvement typically ends at that point. Orbital mechanics begs to disagree about a Mars colony in 10 years. Drug discovery has many steps that take time, even just the trials will take 5 years, let alone actually finding the drugs.

It reminds me of this rather classic post: http://johnsalvatier.org/blog/2017/reality-has-a-surprising-...

Science is not ideas: new conceptual schemes must be invented, confounding variables must be controlled, dead-ends explored. This process takes years.

Engineering is not science: kinks must be worked out, confounding variables incorporated. This process also takes years.

Technology is not engineering: the purely technical implementation must spread, become widespread and beat social inertia and its competition, network effects must be established. Investors and consumers must be convinced in the long term. It must survive social and political repercussions. This process takes yet more years.

Post reply on HN