News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Eli Lilly CEO pushes back on Dario Amodei's ludicrous med... by disgruntledphd2 on Friday November 13, 2026 @10:30AM (#50484986)
> Amodei has a PHD in biophysics and he researched cancer biomarkers at Stanford; it's not like he doesn't know what he's talking about.

That's why I think that something is very weird with his statements. Like, how would this even work?

The feedback loop is much, much, much too slow right now for AI to make things better.

Like, step 1 is build a digital model of the human organism. If you can do this, then yeah maybe the rest is possible. But step 1 is incredibly hard, so it feels unlikely.

That being said, I think the stimulants hypothesis upthread may be correct, as I've heard a lot of crazy stuff from friends on them.

Re:Eli Lilly CEO pushes back on Dario Amodei's ludicrous med... by user43928 on Friday November 13, 2026 @10:47AM (#50485231)
Of course Opus 5.5 is not going to help build a digital model of the human organism.

If we linearly interpret the last year of progress from GPT-5 to Opus 5.5, times 5x, assuming no plateau, could such an intelligence realistically achieve a task like that?

Maybe also not, perhaps some form of RSI would need to deliver accelerating progress.

There are a lot of assumptions and speculation here. Still, at the end of the day, it does not seem that unlikely that they succeed in creating AI that can reason over so many parameters as to remove all intellectual bottlenecks from the process, leaving mainly the physical limitations.

And what is the limit there to building a good model of the human organism? I won't pretend that I know, but simply pointing to clinical trials, as some here do, instead of making an argument based on how such a digital model cannot be created seems unserious.