let me put some more in nvidia now
Abundant Intelligence
51–60 of 136 posts
Re: Abundant Intelligence
#52> Maybe with 10 gigawatts of compute, AI can figure out how to cure cancer.
Something I've never understood: why do AGI perverts think that a superintelligence is any more likely to "cure cancer" than "create unstoppable super-cancer"
Re: Abundant Intelligence
#53Putting aside the questions of (as some comments here have) whether
* AI is a “fucking dud” (you have to be either highly ignorant or trolling to say this)
* Altman is a “charlatan” (definitely no but it does look like he has some unsavory personal traits, quite common BTW for people at that level)
* the ridiculousness of touting a cancer cure (I guess the post is targeted to the technical hoi polloi, with whom such terminology resonates, but also see protein 3D structure discovery advances)
1. Altman clearly signaling affinity for the Abundance bandwagon with a clear reference right in the title. Post is shorter but has the flavor of Marc Andreessen's "It's Time to Build" post from 2020: https://a16z.com/its-time-to-build/
2. He advances the vision of "creat[ing] a factory that can produce a gigawatt of new AI infrastructure every week". This may be called frighteningly ambitious at a minimum: U.S. annual additions have been ~10-20 GW/year for solar builds (https://www.climatecentral.org/report/solar-and-wind-power-2...)
Re: Abundant Intelligence
#54> Our vision is simple: we want to create a factory that can produce a gigawatt of new AI infrastructure every week. If a tenth of this happens, and we don't build a new power plant every ten weeks... then what?
It will create demand for electricity. Demand always creates supply. Perpahs that was the missing link to the mass deployment of solar (because there's just no other way similar amounts of energy can be produced).
Perhaps, but Hank Green published a pretty convincing argument recently that electricity supply has nowhere the necessary elasticity, and the politicised nature of power generation in the US means that isn't going to change:
Re: Abundant Intelligence
#55[deleted]
Re: Abundant Intelligence
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
Stop thinking and give them money. But for real, the leap from GPT4 to GPT5 was nowhere near as impressive as from GTP3 to GPT4. They'll have to do a lot more to give any weight to their usual marketing ultra-hype.
The jump from GPT4 through o3 to GPT5 was very impressive
Agreed. Their naming conventions in a way really broke the perception of progress. GPT-4 to o3 or GPT-5 is truly impressive. The leap from GPT-4o to GPT-5 is less impressive but GPT-4o is generally recognized as GPT-4.
All that being said, it does seem like OpenAI and Anthropic are on a quest for more dollars by promoting fantasy futures where there is not a clear path from A to B, at least to those of us on the outside.
Re: Abundant Intelligence
#57Re: Abundant Intelligence
#58Dorks with forks
Re: Abundant Intelligence
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
years of consistent disappointment with the user experience, along with years of misleading internet propaganda dramatically overselling the quality and power of the underlying technology. it's a fucking dud.
It surprises me that people still believe this! I've seen AI deliver incredible value over the past year. I believe the application level is utilizing <.5% (probably less) of the total value that can be derived from current foundation models.
It's only a niche weird opinion you'll find on forums like HN.
In the real world, it's immensely useful to millions of people. It's possible for a thing to both be incredibly useful and overhyped at the same time.
Re: Abundant Intelligence
#60> If AI stays on the trajectory that we think it will, then amazing things will be possible. Maybe with 10 gigawatts of compute, AI can figure out how to cure cancer. At least the statement starts with a conditional, even if it is a silly one. If you know your growth curve is ultimately going to be a sigmoid, fitting a model with only data points before the inflection point is underdetermined. > If AI stays on the tr…
Assuming AI stays on the trajectory they think it will doesn't mean they assume it will be infinite exponential growth. If you know for a fact it's sigmoid curve, presumably the path you think it will continue on is the sigmoid curve. The trillion dollar question is does performance plateau before or after AI can do the really exciting stuff, and while I may not agree with it myself the more optimistic position is not an unreasonable belief.
Also you can most certainly fit a sigmoid function only from past data points. Any projection will obviously have error, but your error at any given point should be smaller than for an exponential function with the same sampling.