Every S-curve looks like an exponential until you hit the bend.

NitpickLawyer an hour ago | parent | next [-]

We've been hearing this for 3 years now. And especially 25 was full of "they've hit a wall, no more data, running out of data, plateau this, saturated that". And yet, here we are. Models keep on getting better, at more broad tasks, and more useful by the month.

▲

nozzlegear an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> We've been hearing this for 3 years now

Not from me you haven't!

> "they've hit a wall, no more data, running out of data, plateau this, saturated that"

Everyone thought Moore's Law was infallible too, right until they hit that bend. What hubris to think these AI models are different!

But you've probably been hearing that for 3 years too (though not from me).

> Models keep on getting better, at more broad tasks, and more useful by the month.

If you say so, I'll take your word for it.

▲

Cyphase 43 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

25 is 2025.

	▲	nozzlegear 24 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Oh my bad, the way it was worded made me read it as the name of somebody's model or something.

▲

torginus 41 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Except for Moore's law, everyone knew decades ahead of what the limits of Dennard scaling are (shrinking geometry through smaller optical feature sizes), and roughly when we would get to the limit.

Since then, all improvements came at a tradeoff, and there was a definite flattening of progress.

	▲	nozzlegear 21 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> Since then, all improvements came at a tradeoff, and there was a definite flattening of progress. Idk, that sounds remarkably similar to these AI models to me.

▲

fmbb 31 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

> And yet, here we are.

I dunno. To me it doesn’t even look exponential any more. We are at most on the straight part of the incline.

	▲	bopbopbop7 25 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		People are confusing exponential improvement with the exponential pre-IPO marketing budget increase at Anthropic and OpenAI.

▲

raincole an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

This quote would be more impactful if people haven't been repeating it since gpt-4 time.

	▲	kimixa 38 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		People have also been saying we'd be seeing the results of 100x quality improvements in software with corresponding decease in cost since gpt-4 time. So where is that?
	▲	nozzlegear an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I agree, I have been informed that people have been repeating it for three years. Sadly I'm not involved in the AI hype bubble so I wasn't aware. What an embarrassing faux pas!