5 ms·

Altman didn’t say his tech will break the capitalism. He said GAI will break the capitalism. He he also believes we are still very far from it. That’s a signifi

Altman didn’t say his tech will break the capitalism. He said GAI will break the capitalism. He he also believes we are still very far from it. That’s a significant difference. I would vote down the post due to its deception and clickbait.

senttoschool 4y ago
John Carmack thinks there's a 60% chance AGI will happen in 2030 or before. There was an article showing that most predictions in AI has been too pessimistic and that breakthroughs happened sooner than predicted.
- anigbrowl 4y ago
  I agree with him, but this article is still trashy clickbait.
- ggm 4y ago
  This is specious accuracy in odds. Carmack has abosolutely no basis to assign a probability to this breakthrough, and it's as easy to argue its 1000:1 against on the same evidence. If he really said this, he's even more self-promoting than I thought. "There is a 50% chance of fusion power in my lifetime" -based on what evidence?
  - senttoschool 4y ago
    Based on reputation. Ever heard of it? The world runs on reputation as much as actual competency.
    - ggm 4y ago
      I don't mind reputation existing but his basis of reasoning is utterly specious at this point, because nothing. No single thing, whatsoever, from the AI sector would suggest anyone else thinks this is plausible, Aside from other self promoters like Kurzeweil. This is literally proposing the million monkeys are on the brink of Shakspear. Pick up the phone, find Scott Aarenson, and ask him to assign a probability that AGI is coming. I hope you listen to his reasoning why this is both an insanely silly question, and unanswerable at any confidence. Scott also has "reputation" -and peer review. Right now Carmack has "I can code inner loops fast" I am coming back late to edit this: you have literally invoked "an appeal to authority" here. Your basis of reasoning is "Because it's Carmack it can't be wrong"
      - senttoschool 4y ago
        An appeal to authority is a core part of human behavior. Also, I never said this: "Because it's Carmack it can't be wrong". Of course he can be wrong. Anyone can be.
jfengel 4y ago
I don't think it would take GAI to take a serious axe to capitalism, even if not quite breaking it. We're already at a place where capitalism's big advantages become more and more dubious. It's incredibly efficient, but we don't necessarily need more efficiency. A lot of jobs are "bullshit jobs", and persist mostly out of inertia. A lot of jobs aren't bullshit but could be automated with something well shy of general AI. (It still takes a human being to change sheets on a bed and clean a toilet, even though those seem like fairly straightforward tasks.) The post may well be clickbait, but capitalism is already on somewhat shaky ground. AI could be the thing that kicks its feet out from under it, even if it doesn't fully replace human beings. What we get after that is impossible to predict. It could be anywhere from utopia to dystopia. It could even still be "capitalism" by some stretch of the imagination, but with very different characteristics.

senttoschool 4y ago

John Carmack thinks there's a 60% chance AGI will happen in 2030 or before. There was an article showing that most predictions in AI has been too pessimistic and that breakthroughs happened sooner than predicted.

anigbrowl 4y ago
I agree with him, but this article is still trashy clickbait.
ggm 4y ago
This is specious accuracy in odds. Carmack has abosolutely no basis to assign a probability to this breakthrough, and it's as easy to argue its 1000:1 against on the same evidence. If he really said this, he's even more self-promoting than I thought. "There is a 50% chance of fusion power in my lifetime" -based on what evidence?
- senttoschool 4y ago
  Based on reputation. Ever heard of it? The world runs on reputation as much as actual competency.
  - ggm 4y ago
    I don't mind reputation existing but his basis of reasoning is utterly specious at this point, because nothing. No single thing, whatsoever, from the AI sector would suggest anyone else thinks this is plausible, Aside from other self promoters like Kurzeweil. This is literally proposing the million monkeys are on the brink of Shakspear. Pick up the phone, find Scott Aarenson, and ask him to assign a probability that AGI is coming. I hope you listen to his reasoning why this is both an insanely silly question, and unanswerable at any confidence. Scott also has "reputation" -and peer review. Right now Carmack has "I can code inner loops fast" I am coming back late to edit this: you have literally invoked "an appeal to authority" here. Your basis of reasoning is "Because it's Carmack it can't be wrong"
    - senttoschool 4y ago
      An appeal to authority is a core part of human behavior. Also, I never said this: "Because it's Carmack it can't be wrong". Of course he can be wrong. Anyone can be.

jfengel 4y ago

I don't think it would take GAI to take a serious axe to capitalism, even if not quite breaking it. We're already at a place where capitalism's big advantages become more and more dubious. It's incredibly efficient, but we don't necessarily need more efficiency. A lot of jobs are "bullshit jobs", and persist mostly out of inertia. A lot of jobs aren't bullshit but could be automated with something well shy of general AI. (It still takes a human being to change sheets on a bed and clean a toilet, even though those seem like fairly straightforward tasks.) The post may well be clickbait, but capitalism is already on somewhat shaky ground. AI could be the thing that kicks its feet out from under it, even if it doesn't fully replace human beings. What we get after that is impossible to predict. It could be anywhere from utopia to dystopia. It could even still be "capitalism" by some stretch of the imagination, but with very different characteristics.