← Back to context

Comment by sixeyes

5 hours ago

because the rate of improvement is fairly stalled?

You're tragically misinformed; it isn't. Several metrics are actually growing exponentially. But if you want emprical information, you can just have al look at the nature of the late AI incidents.

Ironically, many benchmarks being maxxed out, and quite quickly, so new ones have to be created.

Do you have anything that proves this one way or another that isn't based on vibes or shoddy benchmarks?

  • You prove your own point no? You are asking for a benchmark to prove AGAINST ASI. Surely the burden of proof for such a scientific fiction concept should be the other way around.

Yeah, it's been over a week since a Millennium Problem was solved. AI has hit a wall.

  • It was not solved. ~OpenAI~ Buckmaster and Alpöge found one (or a few) singularities in the forced version of the Navier-Stokes equations. Then magically 2 weeks later OpenAI found them too. Again, I am not saying this is not a great feat. I am just saying that everyone should be a bit more careful when making statements about RSI.

    • Buckmaster and Alpöge has found a forced finite-time singularity for the 3D incompressible Euler equations (and two other types) building on the work by Diego Córdoba and Luis Martínez-Zoroa with the assistance of Anthropic and OpenAI models. Then OpenAI found a forced finite-time singularity for the Navier-Stokes equations.

      TL;DR Buckmaster and Alpöge haven't solved Navier-Stokes blow up.

      How information can get so distorted when it's trivial to fact check?