4 ms·
"If you believe the AI researchers–who have been spot-on accurate for literally" I do not understand what has happened to him here... there was an entire "AI w
by iainctduncan 9mo ago
"If you believe the AI researchers–who have been spot-on accurate for literally"
I do not understand what has happened to him here... there was an entire "AI winter" in the 90's to 2000's because of how wrong researchers were. Has he gone completely delusional? My PhD supervisor has been in AI for 30 years and talks about how it was impossible to get any grant money then because of catastrophically wrong predictions had been.
Like, honest question. I know he's super smart, but this reads like the kind of ramblings you get from religious zealots or scientologists, just complete revisions of known, documented history, and bizarre beliefs in the inevitably of their vision.
It really makes me wonder what such heavy LLM coding use does to one's brain. Is this going to be like the 90's crack wave?
- xorcist 9mo agoMaybe it's not for you as a human to understand. Why presuppose that a human wrote this, as opposed to a language model, given the subject?
- iainctduncan 9mo agoMmm, good point!
- mrandish 9mo agoYeah, I full-stopped on that sentence because it was just so bizarre. I can understand making a counter-to-reality claim and then supporting the claim with context and interpretation to build toward a deeper point. But he just asserts something obviously false and moves on with no comment. Even if he believes that statement is true, it still means he has no ability to model where his reader is coming from (or simply doesn't care).