Live data from Hacker News

After the AI boom: what might we be left with?

blog.robbowley.net

451–460 of 489 posts

Re: After the AI boom: what might we be left with?

#451

The singularity. I don't think most authors of articles like these understand what the AI build up is about, they think it's another fad tool.

We've had AI booms before. In terms of capabilities, this one is following exactly the same trajectory. Human researchers come up with some sort of breakthrough improvement to AI methods, that results in exponential like growth of capability as we both solve the low hanging fruit the method offers at it, and scale up the compute and data available to the limits of what is useful for the method. Then, capabilities sta…

Do you have any proof of progress plateau and any proof that we had been in the past in an exponential AI cycle or you just think that it is so?

Re: After the AI boom: what might we be left with?

#452
post #300

The singularity. I don't think most authors of articles like these understand what the AI build up is about, they think it's another fad tool.

Even if you believe in the Singularity, there will be a crash if investors stop investing before it hits.

Why would they stop investing if they think correctly that AI progress is unstoppable

Re: After the AI boom: what might we be left with?

#453
post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people have more memetic immunity than you're giving them credit for. We're in the early days, people don't fully understand how to treat ChatGPT's outputs. Soon enough, asking an LLM a question and blindly trusting the answer will be seen as ridiculous, like getting all your news from Fox News or Jacobin, or reading ads on websites. Human beings can eventually tell when they're being manipulated, and they ju…

You mention Fox News and people knowing when they're manipulated and I struggle to see how that squares with the current reality of Fox News being the most popular news network and rising populism that very much relies on manipulation.

People want to be manipulated in this case and Fox is just delivering their enemy of choice.

Re: After the AI boom: what might we be left with?

#454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So often, I see comments that seem to make sense only in a vacuum. If the US disappeared from the scene tomorrow, how do you think the geopolitical landscape might change? The competition between the US and China is pertinent to everyone.

What do you mean? I don't see how the commenter was saying anything about the irrelevance of US-China competition, in fact some of their points hinge on the existence of that competition, which is why they described the asticle as very US-centric.

"Very US-centric article. Written by insecure people who are clinging to power and money desperately."

Re: After the AI boom: what might we be left with?

#455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know the quote "it is easier to imagine an end to the world than an end to capitalism"? Well, AI has allowed me to start imagining the end of capitalism. I'm not claiming we're necessarily very close, but I can clearly see the way from here to a post-scarcity society.

> I can clearly see the way from here to a post-scarcity society. I would be interested to hear the way that you see. I don't have any problem seeing a huge number of roadblocks to post-scarcity that AI won't solve, but I am open to a different perspective.

Ok, so as a disclaimer: this obviously leans towards science-fiction, both because that informs my view of the world, and because I think that any prediction of the future must incorporate science fiction.

My own experience, using ChatGPT and Claude for both dev and other business productivity tasks, lends credence to the METR model of exponential improvement in task time-horizon [0]. There are obviously still significant open technical issues, particularly around memory/context management and around online learning, but extensive work is being done on these fronts, propelled amongst other things by the ARC-AGI challenge [1], and I don't see anything that is an actual roadblock to progress. If anything, from my perspective, it seems appears that there are significant low-hanging-fruit opportunities around plain-old software engineering and ergonomics for AI agents, more so than a need for fundamental breakthroughs in neural network architecture (although I believe that these too will come).

So then, with an increasing time horizon and improved task accuracy (much of it assured by improvements in QA mechanisms), we will see ourselves handing off more and more complex tasks to AI agents, until eventually we could have "the factory of the future ... [with] only two employees: a man and a dog", and at that stage I believe that there would be no imperative for humans to work (unless they choose to, or have a deeply ingrained Calvinist work ethic). And then, as you said, we're down to the non-technological roadblocks.

Obviously capitalists would fight to stay in control, and unlike some who expect a fully peaceful and organic transition, I do expect somewhat of a war here (whether kinetic or cold), but I do envision that when push comes to shove, those of us who believe in the free software movement and the foundational principles of democracy will be able to assert shared national/international (rather than corporate) control over the AIs and restructure society into a form where AI (and later robots) perform the work for the benefit of humans who would all share in the bounty. I am not an economist and don't have a clear prediction on the exact form this new society would take, but from my reading of the various pilot implementations of UBI [2], I think that we will see acceptance towards a society where people are essentially in retirement throughout their life. Just as currently, some retired people, choose to only stay home and watch TV, while others study, do art, travel the world, help raise and teach future generations or contribute to social causes close to their hearts, so we'll all be able to do what is in our hearts, without worrying about subsistence.

You may say that I'm a dreamer...

[0] https://metr.org/blog/2025-03-19-measuring-ai-ability-to-com...

[1] https://arcprize.org/leaderboard

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_basic_income_pilots

Re: After the AI boom: what might we be left with?

#456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mention Fox News and people knowing when they're manipulated and I struggle to see how that squares with the current reality of Fox News being the most popular news network and rising populism that very much relies on manipulation.

People want to be manipulated in this case and Fox is just delivering their enemy of choice.

> People want to be manipulated

I don't believe people explicitly (or maybe knowingly) want to be manipulated, though.

Re: After the AI boom: what might we be left with?

#457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quite an interesting read Basically saying we're in war time economy with a race to super intelligence. Whichever super power does it first has won the game. Seeing the last tariffs and what China done about the rare earth minerals (and also the deal the US made with Ukraine for said minerals), the article might have a point that the super power will cripple each other to be the first with the super intelligence. And…

Imagine if super intelligence turns out to be a second organic brain you connect to your default brain..

Many have imagined this. Grok can interpret Neuralink signals without a natural language translation.

Re: After the AI boom: what might we be left with?

#458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who grew up in a very religious country (not the US), Trumps followers will endure any suffering if it means being in service to him (or if it means their enemies will suffer more, or is portrayed to be suffering more).

I don't really know. I think a lot of them migrated off of Bush. I don't have the clip right now but I had old interview videos showing how high and mighty Bush supporters were and how they supported the Iraq war all in going into his second term. They went so far as to act like Trump supporters against anyone who didn't support the "commander in chief" (ie. those people should be put in jail or kicked out). The GFC…

As evidence of this point, “Trump Derangement Syndrome” was originally “Bush Derangement Syndrome”. I have to roll my eyes anytime someone mentions TDS seriously. Although Trump has a cult of personality that Bush did not have; you didn’t have people adorning their lawn with Bush gear in the same way as Trump.

Re: After the AI boom: what might we be left with?

#459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Early day for robotics and AI still. But for a superpower, the potential for (more) autonomous weapons in that intersection is something that (unfortunately) cannot be ignored.

> Early day for robotics and AI still. It's not tho. We've been at it for about 70 years now. Returns have been diminishing exponentially if you look at the amounts invested and we still have bumbling contraptions that are useful in very narrow and contrived use cases. The whole hype is based on wishful/magical thinking. The booster arguments are invariably about some idea in their minds that has no correspondent in…

I am not sure what your specific claims are?

Personally I do not think that we have seen the full battlefield impact of the last 10-20 years developments in microcontrollers, battery, power electronics, electromotors, MEMS sensors, imaging sensors, control firmware, computer vision and object detection. Capability per dollar has increased by a few orders of magnitude in each of these domains. We are seeing some hints of the potential impact now after Russia invaded Ukraine - low-cost drones are now killing and damaging just as much or more as existing high tech weaponry. These systems are crude, with limited autonomy, but it is already enough to wreck havoc. I do not think development of these systems have stopped, unfortunately.

Re: After the AI boom: what might we be left with?

#460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The new superpowers will be the EU Not with how much pulling teeth is required to get them to invest in defense. I don't see how you can unironically make the claim that a written down investment would sink the ship that is the US economy.

The EU moves slowly, but is unstoppable once in motion. A written down investment thats four times the size of the mortgage crisis.

I assure you, this is not a game where “the only winning move is not to play”, in spite of whatever your domestic politicians are feeding the population.
Post reply on HN