emp17344

Spoken like someone who read “Bullshit Jobs” once and mistook it for economic gospel.

I don’t hate it. I just hate the cult-like enthusiasm for it and the associated false claims. Again, your isolated anecdote does not trump the carefully compiled data presented in this post.

Didn’t we just get a bunch of data from Anthropic’s IPO showing that inference is not, in fact, profitable? People are still spouting this?

Isolated anecdotes are all they have, because the actual data shows they’re full of shit. Hence, this post.

Emergence within LLMs is pretty much unproven, and this seems like pretty strong evidence that nothing is really “emerging” here.

Many, many people here have already been sucked into the TESCREAL orbit, and have a quasi-religious belief that AI will be the most important thing to ever happen. Anything that challenges that stance is anathema.

In practice, hallucinations have only mitigated within verifiable domains. The vast, vast majority of human activity is unverifiable, or at least significantly less verifiable than mathematics.

Oh, well if notorious liar Sam Altman and his company notorious for lying says so…

No we’re annoyed because people like you are pretending AI is far more capable than it actually currently is and then acting smug about it.

Seems like a terrible idea in the first place to build an entire organization around a single pop-sci book, but that’s just me.

Or you could just accept that other people disagree with you. It’s perfectly valid to have the opinion that AI models are not “thinking”. Instead, many AI enthusiasts seem interested in browbeating others and policing discussion.

And this apparently also applies to many HN users, many of whom should know better.

Frankly, these mathematicians have more credibility than the sociopaths running OpenAI

You can expect the OpenAI defenders to be out in full force here.

I think we know enough about reinforcement learning to tell that it won’t be able to entirely replace human mathematicians. All of the techniques used by these AI firms are well-studied.

You can imagine whatever you want, but I don’t see why that means we have to take it seriously.

Pretty sure I’m not the delusional one…

Then why is unemployment around 4%? You believe we have AGI and yet it can’t do anyone’s job?

This is silly sci-fi fiction. You guys are inventing scenarios to spook yourselves with - it’s nonsense.

Or it’s an indication that progress has plateaued. But instead of accepting this, you’d rather we just throw out the entire benchmark.

Can’t wait for 3 months from now when they declare they actually really do have AGI this time, please guys just believe us

They call it out but don’t address it. How is that helpful?

Well, the man in charge of OpenAI is a notorious pathological liar. Is that not enough in and of itself to cast doubt on claims like this?

Circles like HN? Seems like a lot of folks here bought into it in the thread discussing the article.

Didn’t they also hire the guy behind Moltbook?

Of course people (apparently) care, as evidenced by this thread. But should they? I certainly don’t think so.

This is like a grade school-tier insult. The entire article is about predictions, of course I’m talking about them. I just think the obsession with the accuracy of short-term predictions is absurd and pedantic.

AI enthusiasts have turned this into a religious war, like it or not. Far too many people here have tied their entire sense of self and worth to the success of AI, and will attack anyone who challenges their narrative that AGI is imminent. They refuse to accept the mere presence of critics, as you can see in this thread. It’s deeply irrational and unreasonable.

Everyone is always throwing darts at a dartboard when making predictions. I don’t know why you think this is a critique that applies exclusively to Zitron.

Ok, but it also means we shouldn’t immediately discredit people who make incorrect short-term predictions, because those are really hard and no individual person consistently gets them right. You can worship at the altar of short-term prediction if you really want, but if you want to be logically consistent, that entails never taking anybody seriously ever.