What I don't really understand with these posts is that they don't at any point contend with the "doomers" argument. Like people get so caught in people acting hypocritical/ having mixed incentives/ or just in many cases personally disliking West Coast billionaire types and the kind of employees they hire. All of which seems fair to point out.

But like the core argument - AI is getting better at core research tasks (coding, math, statistics, science), this feedback loop could lead towards greatly accelerated AI progress of which there is already some clear evidence, if this continues AI will be far more powerful than humans and we might lose control or have other bad consequences - is basically not even engaged with.

▲

ahf8Aithaex7Nai an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Two things:

1. If you reduce the criticism to personal dislike, you’ve built yourself a nice straw man.

2. Where’s the clear evidence? I actually see more evidence that the whole thing is already stagnating and that there won’t be much more to squeeze out of it.

One more thing:

Self-driving cars, the metaverse, Hyperloop, crypto/Web3/NFTs, AGI announcements: I’m so sick and tired of this nonsense. We should just ignore the ramblings of these crackpots.

	▲	jackb4040 a minute ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Thank you so much for calling out the crypto comparison! > What I don't really understand with these posts is that they don't at any point contend with the "to the moon" argument. Like people get so caught in crypto bros acting hypocritical/ having mixed incentives/ or just in many cases personally disliking crypto billionaire types and the kind of employees they hire. All of which seems fair to point out. > But like the core argument - crypto is getting better at core financial tasks (trading, lending, payments, asset issuance), this feedback loop could lead towards greatly accelerated financial innovation of which there is already some clear evidence, if this continues crypto will be far more powerful than traditional finance and we might get to the point where everything is onchain and we're all going to make it - is basically not even engaged with.
	▲	Gregkion 34 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		2. Astra just came out and Fable 5/5.1 too. These are SIGNIFICANT better in plenty of tasks than Opus in November. Try it out. Ask Opus 4.8 to do anything in 3d. Do the same with Fable or Astra. Just because you list up some type of random technology, doesn't make it an good argument. Metaverse, Hyperloop and the crypto stuff was clearly garbage from the beginning. Easy to dismiss because all of it had massive faults. Metaverse: The interface wasn't good, content creation was way too hard Hyperloop: Savety was never an issue for Musk but it was obvoiuse. Peopel were building tunnels for ages. Crypto: Yeah just beacuse i let my computer run and waste 1kw of energy doesn't mean its suddenly valuable. NFTs: 'digital scarcity' yeah right XD But lets be clear, 5 years ago if you would have asked anyone if they could build a system for a billion dollars which you can talk to and it would code stuff for you and use blender and a coputer, that would have been unthinkable. We have opened up a potential pandoras box without knowing it. Machine learning is now everywere and the amount of compute we install right now is crazy.

▲

reducesuffering 43 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Because they can't. If they actually engaged with it, they would realize how shallow the "doomer" / existential risk dismissals are. Meanwhile there are ample essays and arguments about the existential issues from Turing award winners, frontier lab CEO's, and many more. There's also https://ai-2040.com/ , you will never see the equivalent on the other side of the debate because it won't hold under any scrutiny.