Oh my. I had no idea until now, that was exactly the same flavor and apparently, this is no coincidence.

I'm not sure it was prophetic, it was a good survey of the field, but the claim was...a plot of grade schooler to PhD against year.

I'm glad he got a paycheck from OpenAI at one point in time.

I got one from Google in one point in time.

Both of these projects are puffery, not scientific claims of anything, or claims of anything at all other than "at timestamp N+1, AI will be better than timestamp N, on an exponential curve"

Utterly bog-standard boring claim going back to 2016 AFAIK. Not the product of considered expertise. Not prophetic.

Furthermore, there were so many predictions by everyone - especially people with a vested interest for VC to make them flow money in - that something has to be true.

Since the people on less wrong like bayesian statistics, the probability of having someone says the right thing given the assumption that there a shitton of people saying different things is... Not surprisingly, high