Yes, actually I would. There's a long list of people in my career path who bet on me sticking to my guns against compelling evidence to the contrary. But I know, I know, that's impossible! Anyway, after they figured out I would change my mind, then they described me as lacking conviction because you can't win, but I digress.

But upfront, it's a detailed path with specific breakthroughs and a concrete plan to achieve or it's just more fanfic from doomer fanbois. Gary Marcus wrote a fantastic critique of AI 2027. Start there.

▲

SpicyLemonZest an hour ago | parent [-]

I've read Gary Marcus's critique of AI 2027. How do you grapple with the fact that superhuman coding arrived on schedule, despite his skepticism that it would? Doesn't that mean that the other predictions are also more plausible than we may think?

▲

LogicFailsMe 35 minutes ago | parent [-]

Superhuman coding has not happened.

I work with Codex and Claude daily. They're fantastic for script coding, config issues, and simple projects. They lose the plot on bigger things to this day. Just last night, Astra decided to cheat to present the illusion of progress until I called its BS. And I was so looking forward to finally working with the AGI. Humans remain the muse, the common sense, and the manager of making these things productive. And as much as I agree with Carmack's suggestion to not become the out of touch Kung Fu Master:

https://x.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/2098443262214230095

working with them on projects daily gives me a pretty tactical read on what they can and cannot do IMO.

That's how I reconcile it.

But let's say it had. That's just 1 of 20 events that have to happen in sequence to hit the jackpot here.

	▲	SpicyLemonZest 12 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		We understand "superhuman coding" to mean very different things, and I think it's a me problem that I can't figure out where you're coming from, because it doesn't sound like our practical experience differs. I'm going to have to think on this.