← Back to context

Comment by aspenmartin

11 hours ago

Yet the evidence is on the side of the hype? We don’t see any mechanism or cogent framework for what limits exist here theoretically that I’m aware of, are you? Epoch had a great article a year ago looking at several bottlenecks in terms of scale and back then we were about 4 orders of magnitude away from hitting them. We’re probably now closer to 3. Yet scale is only part of the performance equation, a fairly big chunk of progress is from algorithmic or curation related contributions. The point of the article is:

> But those skeptics are initially responding to the constant AI hype claims that we are exponentially growing to AGI.

This is a meaningless statement or at best just strawmanning.

Why is the evidence on the side of the hype? Why do you assume something is size X just because nobody has proved it's smaller yet?

The evidence is just whatever it is - we cannot make predictions with it.