3 ms·
Experts are known to be bad predictors of the future outcome of their fields. Many times these predictions obey the Gaes-Marreau law. In the case of AI, accord
by chicob 9y ago
Experts are known to be bad predictors of the future outcome of their fields. Many times these predictions obey the Gaes-Marreau law.
In the case of AI, according to one particular study, something similar happens: expert predictions are contradictory, indistinguishable from both non-expert predictions and past failed predictions.
https://intelligence.org/files/PredictingAI.pdf https://intelligence.org/files/PredictingAI.pdf
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- rhaps0dy 9y agoI cannot find anything on Google about the "Gaes-Marreau Law" or "gaes-marreau". Could you please link me to something that explains it?
- gwern 9y agoIt's 'Maes–Garreau law'. Kelly made up a 'law' based on a few AI predictions falling into a certain range; but you can see from the linked paper (which uses like 20x more predictions) that it's not really that accurate a law and there's more that goes into AI forecasts than just +X years. (For example, China vs the West in OP, which is interesting and makes sense thinking about it, but hadn't occurred to me.)
- chicob 9y agoYes, it's not actually a law, but a (perhaps cynical) heuristic. Possible interpretations: * People do not want to sound too optimistic but they hope to see some improvements before they die; * People hope they are dead before someone proves them wrong; * People deal with temporal magnitudes in the order of the human lifespan and close multiples. The last one, and then the first, are my guesses.