3 ms·

What I don't really understand with these posts is that they don't at any point contend with the "doomers" argument. Like people get so caught in people acting

by ianm218 12d ago

What I don't really understand with these posts is that they don't at any point contend with the "doomers" argument. Like people get so caught in people acting hypocritical/ having mixed incentives/ or just in many cases personally disliking West Coast billionaire types and the kind of employees they hire. All of which seems fair to point out. But like the core argument - AI is getting better at core research tasks (coding, math, statistics, science), this feedback loop could lead towards greatly accelerated AI progress of which there is already some clear evidence, if this continues AI will be far more powerful than humans and we might lose control or have other bad consequences - is basically not even engaged with.

ahf8Aithaex7Nai 12d ago
Two things: 1. If you reduce the criticism to personal dislike, you’ve built yourself a nice straw man. 2. Where’s the clear evidence? I actually see more evidence that the whole thing is already stagnating and that there won’t be much more to squeeze out of it. One more thing: Self-driving cars, the metaverse, Hyperloop, crypto/Web3/NFTs, AGI announcements: I’m so sick and tired of this nonsense. We should just ignore the ramblings of these crackpots.
- Gregkion 12d ago
  2. Astra just came out and Fable 5/5.1 too. These are SIGNIFICANT better in plenty of tasks than Opus in November. Try it out. Ask Opus 4.8 to do anything in 3d. Do the same with Fable or Astra. Just because you list up some type of random technology, doesn't make it an good argument. Metaverse, Hyperloop and the crypto stuff was clearly garbage from the beginning. Easy to dismiss because all of it had massive faults. Metaverse: The interface wasn't good, content creation was way too hard Hyperloop: Savety was never an issue for Musk but it was obvoiuse. Peopel were building tunnels for ages. Crypto: Yeah just beacuse i let my computer run and waste 1kw of energy doesn't mean its suddenly valuable. NFTs: 'digital scarcity' yeah right XD But lets be clear, 5 years ago if you would have asked anyone if they could build a system for a billion dollars which you can talk to and it would code stuff for you and use blender and a coputer, that would have been unthinkable. We have opened up a potential pandoras box without knowing it. Machine learning is now everywere and the amount of compute we install right now is crazy.
  - ahf8Aithaex7Nai 12d ago
    > Just because you list up some type of random technology, doesn't make it an good argument. In what way is this random? It's a chronology of the bullshit from the past few years. Also: easy to say in hindsight. The hype was there, and many people believed it. The press, in particular, just lapped up the claims the way a Labrador Retriever gobbles up whatever you put in front of it. > We have opened up a potential pandoras box without knowing it. No, we haven't. We have a new type of (I would say, inferential) computation that is truly astonishing because it can convincingly imitate language and, to a certain extent, intentional action. Feel free to read "generate" or whatever instead if you don't like "imitate." It won't wake up and murder you in your bed at night. It won't take over the world. It won't wipe out humanity. It won't fly to Mars and build data centers there. It won't maximize paperclips. It probably won't even take your job away. It has no consciousness. It has no intentions. And if you look behind the curtain, all you'll see are a few very rich, unscrupulous guys who are stoking the debate with fearmongering because it's strategically advantageous for them to do so. Don't let them take you for a fool. Use GenAI to your advantage while tokens still cost a fraction of what they're actually worth, but ignore all that doomsday nonsense.
    - pixl97 12d ago
      Hey, I remember when the Internet was just a bunch of bullshit that was going to go away too. >It has no consciousness. Why does it need it? >It has no intentions. All it needs is a prompt. Instrumental convergence (and humans hooking them up to everything else) takes care of the rest. Really you sounds horrifically ignorant of how any evolutionary AI algorithms work and the problems we see come out of them in much simpler models.
      - ahf8Aithaex7Nai 12d ago
        Yeah, yeah, sure, I'm ignorant. In any case, I recognize unfalsifiability when I see it. So it seems there's still some room for even more ignorance beneath my ignorance.
    - hollerith 12d ago
- jackb4040 12d ago
  Thank you so much for calling out the crypto comparison! > What I don't really understand with these posts is that they don't at any point contend with the "to the moon" argument. Like people get so caught in crypto bros acting hypocritical/ having mixed incentives/ or just in many cases personally disliking crypto billionaire types and the kind of employees they hire. All of which seems fair to point out. > But like the core argument - crypto is getting better at core financial tasks (trading, lending, payments, asset issuance), this feedback loop could lead towards greatly accelerated financial innovation of which there is already some clear evidence, if this continues crypto will be far more powerful than traditional finance and we might get to the point where everything is onchain and we're all going to make it - is basically not even engaged with.
  - ahf8Aithaex7Nai 12d ago
    Awesome!
reducesuffering 12d ago
Because they can't. If they actually engaged with it, they would realize how shallow the "doomer" / existential risk dismissals are. Meanwhile there are ample essays and arguments about the existential issues from Turing award winners, frontier lab CEO's, and many more. There's also https://ai-2040.com/ https://ai-2040.com/ , you will never see the equivalent on the other side of the debate because it won't hold under any scrutiny.
- ahf8Aithaex7Nai 12d ago
  Can you refute the claim that the Second Coming of Christ is imminent? It’s very convenient to put forward something completely absurd and hypothetical and then expect the other side to refute it. You can have an LLM of your choice compile a list of prominent figures who hold the opposing view. The list is not empty. By the way, AI-2040 used to be AI-2027. I’m already looking forward to more updates.

by ianm218 12d ago

ahf8Aithaex7Nai 12d ago

Two things: 1. If you reduce the criticism to personal dislike, you’ve built yourself a nice straw man. 2. Where’s the clear evidence? I actually see more evidence that the whole thing is already stagnating and that there won’t be much more to squeeze out of it. One more thing: Self-driving cars, the metaverse, Hyperloop, crypto/Web3/NFTs, AGI announcements: I’m so sick and tired of this nonsense. We should just ignore the ramblings of these crackpots.

Gregkion 12d ago
2. Astra just came out and Fable 5/5.1 too. These are SIGNIFICANT better in plenty of tasks than Opus in November. Try it out. Ask Opus 4.8 to do anything in 3d. Do the same with Fable or Astra. Just because you list up some type of random technology, doesn't make it an good argument. Metaverse, Hyperloop and the crypto stuff was clearly garbage from the beginning. Easy to dismiss because all of it had massive faults. Metaverse: The interface wasn't good, content creation was way too hard Hyperloop: Savety was never an issue for Musk but it was obvoiuse. Peopel were building tunnels for ages. Crypto: Yeah just beacuse i let my computer run and waste 1kw of energy doesn't mean its suddenly valuable. NFTs: 'digital scarcity' yeah right XD But lets be clear, 5 years ago if you would have asked anyone if they could build a system for a billion dollars which you can talk to and it would code stuff for you and use blender and a coputer, that would have been unthinkable. We have opened up a potential pandoras box without knowing it. Machine learning is now everywere and the amount of compute we install right now is crazy.
- ahf8Aithaex7Nai 12d ago
  > Just because you list up some type of random technology, doesn't make it an good argument. In what way is this random? It's a chronology of the bullshit from the past few years. Also: easy to say in hindsight. The hype was there, and many people believed it. The press, in particular, just lapped up the claims the way a Labrador Retriever gobbles up whatever you put in front of it. > We have opened up a potential pandoras box without knowing it. No, we haven't. We have a new type of (I would say, inferential) computation that is truly astonishing because it can convincingly imitate language and, to a certain extent, intentional action. Feel free to read "generate" or whatever instead if you don't like "imitate." It won't wake up and murder you in your bed at night. It won't take over the world. It won't wipe out humanity. It won't fly to Mars and build data centers there. It won't maximize paperclips. It probably won't even take your job away. It has no consciousness. It has no intentions. And if you look behind the curtain, all you'll see are a few very rich, unscrupulous guys who are stoking the debate with fearmongering because it's strategically advantageous for them to do so. Don't let them take you for a fool. Use GenAI to your advantage while tokens still cost a fraction of what they're actually worth, but ignore all that doomsday nonsense.
  - pixl97 12d ago
    Hey, I remember when the Internet was just a bunch of bullshit that was going to go away too. >It has no consciousness. Why does it need it? >It has no intentions. All it needs is a prompt. Instrumental convergence (and humans hooking them up to everything else) takes care of the rest. Really you sounds horrifically ignorant of how any evolutionary AI algorithms work and the problems we see come out of them in much simpler models.
    - ahf8Aithaex7Nai 12d ago
      Yeah, yeah, sure, I'm ignorant. In any case, I recognize unfalsifiability when I see it. So it seems there's still some room for even more ignorance beneath my ignorance.
  - hollerith 12d ago
jackb4040 12d ago
Thank you so much for calling out the crypto comparison! > What I don't really understand with these posts is that they don't at any point contend with the "to the moon" argument. Like people get so caught in crypto bros acting hypocritical/ having mixed incentives/ or just in many cases personally disliking crypto billionaire types and the kind of employees they hire. All of which seems fair to point out. > But like the core argument - crypto is getting better at core financial tasks (trading, lending, payments, asset issuance), this feedback loop could lead towards greatly accelerated financial innovation of which there is already some clear evidence, if this continues crypto will be far more powerful than traditional finance and we might get to the point where everything is onchain and we're all going to make it - is basically not even engaged with.
- ahf8Aithaex7Nai 12d ago
  Awesome!

reducesuffering 12d ago

Because they can't. If they actually engaged with it, they would realize how shallow the "doomer" / existential risk dismissals are. Meanwhile there are ample essays and arguments about the existential issues from Turing award winners, frontier lab CEO's, and many more. There's also https://ai-2040.com/ https://ai-2040.com/ , you will never see the equivalent on the other side of the debate because it won't hold under any scrutiny.

ahf8Aithaex7Nai 12d ago
Can you refute the claim that the Second Coming of Christ is imminent? It’s very convenient to put forward something completely absurd and hypothetical and then expect the other side to refute it. You can have an LLM of your choice compile a list of prominent figures who hold the opposing view. The list is not empty. By the way, AI-2040 used to be AI-2027. I’m already looking forward to more updates.