iNow

An apt comparison, as is our ability to read maps now with Google and Apple Maps or remember phone numbers now with phone contacts

Separate from the core topic under discussion, but likely interesting to the participants here given the subject matter: OpenAI announced one of its general-purpose reasoning models autonomously cracked a famous geometry problem that stumped mathematicians for 80 years. The implications are enormous: An AI capable of original mathematical discovery could unlock breakthroughs across science, engineering and medicine. https://openai.com/index/model-disproves-discrete-geometry-conjecture/

Cool story, bruh. Aka: One anecdote does not a trend make. I appreciate that we have different POVs on this, but stop acting like a giant douchebag, please. Your disrespect while authentic is unhelpful and unconducive to progress.

Encourage you move to codex (yes, an openAI offering but distinct from ChatGPT) or Claude code or even Hermes to correct your misconceptions I can see I needed to be more precise. There’s probably a handful of programmers still better on some coding metrics. That number becomes vanishingly smaller and smaller by the day tho

This seems like such a strange comment from someone usually so well informed about tech. AI coding has already far surpassed the capabilities of even the best coders and did so weeks ago. Probably. It’s more the agentic layer and doing proof of concepts. For example, the AI has access to funds whether BTC or a credit card on Stripe. You then show it a picture of your speeding ticket and say “take care of this” with no other guidance and… it does. “Look at my mother in laws social posts and pick a present for her birthday that’s something she would like based on comments and which is less than $40 and have it sent to her house with a card saying it’s from me.” This is already live. Even doctors are checking their work with the newer models bc they’ve become so good

We absolutely should. I just lay blame at the feet of a slow government distracted by partisanship and mango dictators instead of companies competing with each other for ever better performing models on a free and open market of ideas and development. It’s not just the US building this stuff either which amplifies my fatalism a bit On steroids and driving a Ducati. We again agree. I’m glad to see you’ve finally cut back a bit on your caffeine intake. 🥸 What did you have in mind to achieve that end? You potentially will have an ally in me once I better understand your proposal, but transparently I have no idea what steps you believe will meaningfully and sufficiently address the challenges being cited here and in related AI threads. It’s not just combining knowledge. It’s finding new previously unrealized connections and generating new ideas. AIs can also now talk to each other in a Reddit style environment and learn from each other. They can use bitcoin to purchase items and direct humans to build things (think DoorDash but a robot added the outcome to the cart). The last few models have been built using their predecessor variants and they’re becoming more mind blowing capable each time. From what I can see, the limit is not one set by hardware, but by power sources. We lack sufficient energy production and transfer to power the data centers needed (assuming China doesn’t also impose a hardware limit by invading Taiwan and refusing to sell / share their stockpiles of rare earths)

This is totally fair, and I know you’ve been concerned about declining student capabilities as a trend since long before AI (like shorter attention spans due to social media, for example) so I know that context matters. At the end of the day though the toothpaste is already out of the tube in this one. We aren’t gonna put it back in so need to learn to use it or clean it up somehow after the fact. And FWIW I’m not at all comfortable with the ever increasing layoff risk it imposes on me and my colleagues. I just try separating the personal impact from the higher level view of what’s becoming possible and how much it’s flattening the ability to achieve things even among those who lack access and resources.

It’s interesting to me how much you’re both focusing on the marketing / press release layer which is barely relevant to the viral spread and layers of organic end users discussing the new and rapidly advancing capabilities and new opportunity landscape the AIs make available. The coding capabilities are so profound that before summer is out AIs will be able to code their own improvements. That’s scarier to me than some corporate executive with an index card full of talking points and scripted video clips.

The AI gave a correct answer. The question wasn’t properly framed. What would happen if a piano fell on you? You’d b-flat

We clearly navigate different circles in our respective work lives. That’s fine but benefits are there in spades from where I sit. This is for sure true. AI has been around a long time and is far more than chatbots. I don’t disagree but I also think it’s a mistake to lay that blame primarily at the feet of the companies releasing the models. This is a viral cultural phenomenon we’re living through. It’s more than mere hype by quite a wide margin, even though we agree hype is happening. It’s the market doing that more than the companies IMO. Those who have tried to slow down and maturely think through them ethics were simply superseded and surpassed by competitors who didn’t care about those mores. The ones doing it right were entering the ring with one hand tied behind their backs and getting beaten. See also: open source model development in China. In most cases it’s not being sold at all but used for free. We agree it’s a crutch. So is my calculator and my reading glasses though. I tend to agree. They’ve focused on central planning and given authority to key technocrats to achieve very specific outcomes. There want an educated populace and even tuned their TikTok algorithm to encourage pro sociaI personal growth activities among their own populace while feeding western algorithms with digital opiums

Every mushroom is edible. Some only once, though

So you both think this is a well executed marketing campaign and AI has become a viral social movement due to great corporate advertisements? That it’s not infusing every discussion across every topic organically bc users are so blown away by their experience that they tell all their friends and evangelize it everywhere they can. Do I have that correct?

“Better” is subjective, but I’m firmly in the camp of yes. Was the internal combustion engine better than the horse drawn buggy? Was the horse drawn buggy better than the load carried on shoulders and walked across lands on foot? Is the EV better than the ICE vehicle? Not across every single metric, but “better” across and among the most important of them? Yes, 100%, but the manner by which we engage them must evolve and must account for the different sets of risks and limitations that transformation brings. It’s an impact driver instead of a screwdriver. Not applicable to every situation and requires appropriate usage, but better across the most relevant metrics in nearly every way and getting better by the minute… making Moores law look glacial. It’s a clear yes from me here too and I can think of multiple obvious supporting examples, but better explored elsewhere / separate thread IMO It’s just another tool. Whether a framing hammer or a jack hammer, the onus to use it properly resides with the user.

I'd add that we must also be careful accepting answers from search engines, and from journal articles, and from books, and from people, and podcasts, and ad infinitum ... basically from all information sources

The main counterpoint from my perspective is that even though these models CAN do amazing new physics, that doesn't mean that they WILL do amazing new physics. They will still be subject to generating slop and garbage just like any other model if the person prompting them is not sufficiently advanced or clear on their expectations (like the deeply knowledgeable physicists who drove this item and had the ability to check the models work). It's insanely cool and represents an orders of magnitude advancement in capabilities, but the core point of this thread remains intact: You have to be careful accepting answers from AI.

On AI capability development timelines, that’s like centuries

Meanwhile, vibe physics is already happening and getting published https://www.latent.space/p/lupsasca?publication_id=1084089&post_id=196292432

Thanks for the thoughtful answer.

Curious to explore further what the source of that ambient / background noise in the system might be or where it comes from in your opinion. Waves of nearly all varieties tend toward stillness... the waves ripple until tiny enough to be gone / turn to heat. In the neural system, likely this would be the same were it not for incoming stimulus... internal stimulus too... but somewhere there must be a "rock" getting dropped into the "pond" creating the initial ripple. Struggling to put words to my question without venturing into the abstract, but the noise being suppressed... where might that come from / what might be the source of that? Okay if you don't know. Just putting out there a question which arose for me as I read your update above.

At the very least with other great apes, but far more likely it’s sooner with other primates and maybe even mammals and potentially sooner. Where the exact starting point is less relevant IMO than the idea that it almost certainly didn’t start with humanity.

I challenge the premise and posit that it evolved long before humans ever entered the scene

Cool take. Saw fully blooming cherry blossom trees in a small German town just last week and did the Washington DC peak bloom trip with my kids this time last year. Hadn’t realized we’d have had to plan same trip for April during earlier centuries but it completely makes sense

It gets even more squirrelly if China uses these distractions, elevated fuel prices, and shortages of amo and focus as an opportunity to take Taiwan.

If you’ve met one person with autism, you’ve met one person with autism.