← Back to context

Comment by noir_lord

18 hours ago

Recursive self improvement of their upcoming IPO value maybe.

They are fluffy PR pieces otherwise.

I tried to build a procedural 3d asset pipeline for a specific use case.

Before the Opus upgrade in November it was basically no way of doing this. I gave up very quickly.

After November i tried again, and no model could build me anything relevant.

Now it just works. Took me an hour to progress to a point were i'm happy.

Whatever they do, progress is still real, still way faster than I assumed

The list of Ubuntus 2404 LTS CVEs is HUGE. Another indicator that a lot of stuff got a lot better fast.

Feel free to be as dismissive as you want, but if you are not careful, you might be 'suddenly' surprised and you might not be prepared for the conclusion of AGI level agents.

  • What would being prepared look like? A house in the woods with a store of food? Knowing how to pick door locks and set up a militia in the desert?

How can you possible say this sort of thing in context of what looks like a millenium prize being solved.

I swear there's nobody blinder than those who won't see.

  • Because it seems like most of the work may have been done by human mathematicians and cribbed by OpenAI at the last minute

    • The human mathematicians didn't solve the Navier-Stokes problem, they solved the Euler problem. And they were extensively using LLMs to drive the work, as described in the Buckmaster statement.

      Any way you cut it, this is a major achievement for AI, besotted with human drama over whose prompt should be recognized by the history books.

  • I don't think we should assume a millenium puzzle has been solved, yet. Astra showed impressive capacity for cheating when it was faced with impossible cybersecurity challenges. It seems equally plausible at this stage that it's found a bug in Lean.

  • You have to look at the incentives

    • Incentives are one thing, even adjusting for them it's huge, and I don't understand this incentive play for only openai, academics have perverse incentives too, to overreport, overclaim, publication bias etc why are we scrutinizing AI industry to such high degree when they have demonstrated capability and often times are off by a model release at worst.

  • People will cling to views as long as they possibly can, despite evidence slapping them in the face.

    Eventually it won't matter. Arguments over whether LLMs are "truly" intelligent are going to be a matter of philosophy, and look a little silly.