> 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 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

25 is 2025.

	▲	nozzlegear 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Oh my bad, the way it was worded made me read it as the name of somebody's model or something.

▲

torginus 2 hours 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 2 hours 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.