so it was just schizo nonsense all along?

seems on track to me

we are at media attention

https://metr.org/blog/2025-03-19-measuring-ai-ability-to-complete-long-tasks/

Still on track

>>106182919 (OP)
we'll know for sure in 10 years time

>>106182919 (OP)
Expecting exponential growth when we have a finite amount of data was a flawed assumption

we're all guessing anyway, why are you asking like this is a solved question

>>106183124
Most models are trained on synthetic data now

creative writing belongs on /lit/ you demented faggots

>>106183124
that's why AI gathered/generated data is such an important leap.
If, and it's a big if, artificial data can produce a net positive, everyone agrees exponential would be on the table

>>106183141
Fish cant do surgery

>>106183154
>doesnt solve for context problem
>muh synthetic data
ur a complete retard.

>>106182919 (OP)
i listened to the dwarkesh podcast with these guys. profoundly unserious people, bay area is absolutely cooked.

>>106183182
theyre grifting complete cargo cultists aka ai fanbois
a retarded nigger and his money are easily parted

>>106183127
current thing bad

>>106183154
It cannot understand or innovate, or create anything new. It has no theory of mind. It's not a fucking intelligence.

>>106183124
You're wrong. There's synthetic data, such as video games, board games, verifiable problems, etc, and there is self-play as possible ways to improve beyond "gathered data". Later there's real world immersion, and also the possibility of architectural improvements.

You ever think about how there's no organic demand for AI products or services, no AI business has been able to make a profit yet while collectively investing hundreds of billions of dollars into the technology, and the whole industry's growth is dependent on Nvidia GPU sales?

>>106183086
what the fuck are you talking about? we are literally on return to mean

two years ago sam altman was asking for trillions of dollars and telling investors they had AGI in the labs... meanwhile these days every week each major AI company leapfrogs each other, and yet they still sound retarded when you talk to it

how much money does y-combinator pay you?

>>106183824
>no organic demand
lol surely this is bait but I gotta take it

if AI enjoyment weren't organic, there wouldn't be a dozen threads on /g/ every day on how to run/train open source models yourself.

Synthetic data only increases existing bias, it's not varied like humans and won't bring any large improvement. You're retarded if you think otherwise

>>106183846
>AI enjoyment
AI porn more like

>>106183831
>how much money does y-combinator pay you
I get paid in experience

>>106183086
This is for you.

>>106183846
Putting aside /g/ being a microscopic niche community of tech enthusiasts that doesn't reflect any broader market, nobody here wants to pay for AI.

>>106183995
you literally couldn't be any more wrong about /g/ being macroscopic

nobody in the world wants to pay for AI, thats why theres so many comapnies trying to release edge AI systems. Apple flexes their huge ram for AI, AMD just released some mini-PCs for AI, and intel literally revived dual-GPU cards specifically for AI.

theres so much demand for local/open AI that every major player has their finger in the pie, you're just dumb

>>106183824
There's demand in software but it can't even replace front-end web developpers.

>>106184517
I interact with a lot of normies and only 2 out of 20 pay for AI and use it professionally. Of the other 19, maybe 5 or 6 use it casually. The rest don't care about it.

The corpos got heavily invested into this shit, it's like the Web3 bubble or Meta. Except the amount of money poured into it is way, way bigger, so they have no choice but to double down and see if they can use it to automate jobs or get some benefit out of it.

They are forcing this on users to try to create a demand that doesn't exist. Literally nobody cares to pay for this shit.

>>106184517
I interact with a lot of normies and only 2 out of 20 pay for AI and use it professionally. Of the other 18, maybe 5 or 6 use it casually. The rest don't care about it.

The corpos got heavily invested into this shit, it's like the Web3 bubble or the Metaverse. Except the amount of money poured into it is way, way bigger, so they have no choice but to double down and see if they can use it to automate jobs or get some benefit out of it.

They are forcing this on users to try to create a demand that doesn't exist. Literally nobody cares enough to pay for this shit.

>>106184517
>AMD just released some mini-PCs for AI
they getting us used to soldered RAM on any computer

>>106185441
Maybe the free tier is good enough for the causual users. Youtube was free without ads for a while.

sorry MBAs, you're going to keep paying six figure salaries to people who spend two hours a day working and you're going to like it
nice try with the whole AI thing though!

Web3 is pretty good

>>106185441
>normies and only 2 out of 20 pay for AI and use it professionally. Of the other 18, maybe 5 or 6 use it casually. The rest don't care about it
Sounds like internet when it was good.

>>106182919 (OP)
Doesn’t it make sense to stop using the word artificial when we have surpassed human ability?

Wouldn’t it just be we invented superinteligence

>>106185527
You know what happens next

>>106183124
Exponential growth isn't even what we want.
Everyone's already falling back to MoE and using routers to save costs. Nobody can afford the nuclear power plant it requires to gen shitty ghibli memes.

Growing intelligence past what we have requires a different architecture from Transformers. So far all we're doing is making prettier voices and better world representations. That's not a fundamentally different architecture, those are just features hacked onto transformers.

>>106182919 (OP)
Always has been

>>106187234
I was thinking that the other day.

Intelligence is probably just intelligence, the silicon kind may not be more artificial than we are.

>>106187234
It's called artificial because we made it. Natural would be as if it emerged from the ether, like we did.
It's anthropocentrism.

>>106187379
Only mulattos care this much about those plausible lie generators, because the whole existence of the USA now depends on it.

>>106182919 (OP)
AI is trash, EUchads win again.

>>106183086

>>106182919 (OP)
>so it was just schizo nonsense all along?
Always was. The hardware we have is at least 2-3 orders of magnitude slower than the hardware needed for AGI and at least 4-5 orders of magnitude slower than the hardware needed for ASI.

>>106183824
>no organic demand
My boomer mom uses AI every day (and believes every word it says as gospel) on her smartphone whenever she needs information or doesn't understand anything. She never even used google in the past because it was too hard for her to use. AI however? Easiest thing ever. She uses the voice feature and she is a power user. I heard this is common among the elderly.

My normalfag wife also uses AI daily but in a different capacity. She uses it to come up with new entertainment or parenting tips for my son, or to brainstorm ideas and plans she has to bounce off of.

I use it to code at work daily and it's become indispensable.

Those are three completely different demographics all organically demanding AI. It's a real thing that everyone uses nowadays.

>>106187806
my big concern about boomers using AI is that they likely have no idea about the shortcomings since they're not constantly being subjected to power user opinions through youtube or random threads
I wonder if they would be able to identify the glazing or if they would never notice

>>106182919 (OP)
No, marketing.

>>106182919 (OP)
>duuude AI will never be as smart as humans
Meanwhile AI makes photorealistic videos out of thin air. Anyone pretending that humans outperform AI is coping already

>>106183860
Plus the models already work fine on the existing data. The "issue" (i.e. why they can't improve more) is that a bunch of text data from the internet is not a complete map of reality. Synthetic data is a map of nothing, so it will indeed lead to nothing.

>>106187890
>Synthetic data is a map of nothing
Gee I hope it doesn't get access to Street View where it will be able to see the entire world as is. I hope Google isn't working on AI
AI is only training on forum posts right

>>106187909
A bunch of street view data is also a hopelessly incomplete map of reality. And you're going to need a whole lot of it to get anywhere. They've been doing it for decades with computer vision and it still sucks dick. LLMs make no difference to it.

>>106187922
>A bunch of street view data is also a hopelessly incomplete map of reality
Well shit this is everything Google has access to. It's not like they own youtube or something. I guess that's it then

>>106187806
That might be one of the reasons I don't like LLMs that much. Through years of using computers and programming I got used to different interfaces and I believe I can do many things more efficiently than through natural language. If you only want to communicate in natural language then LLMs are obviously great, even if they only exposed functionality that was already accessible through different interfaces.

>>106183984
ironic

>>106188052
Iconic, perforce.

>>106183846
Entirely detached from reality to project a niche autistic imageboard's hobby horse onto entirety of society
Really not sending their best

>>106182919 (OP)
the whole (((scenario))) is schizo nonsense. main reasons are:
>china will surpass usa this year or 2026 at worst and us will play the catch up
>china releases open source stuff so the power isn't centralized
so basically it's gonna be even wilder once every jew and palestinian has access to a bioweapon-making asi

the only thing it got correctly is the timeline. might be a year off, but we'll definitely reach the intelligence explosion by 27/28, regardless of oai's flops

>>106183086
I feel like we're closing to denial already. AI oversaturation and fatigue have been a thing for half a year now and CEO/shills are becoming more and more desperate lately. Can't wait for the next big thing, I just hope to jump on the train early and farm stupid people's money for the whole track this time. And that it will be less cringe than AI.

>>106182919 (OP)
The increase in cognitive abilities already much slower than anticipated, most models 20 years ago predicted a ridiculous 'technological singularity' and 'intelligence explosion' shortly after AI being able to speak. That never happened. If you want to surpass the human brain, you first need to have all properties of human neurons and the arch of the brain. might as well start with the brain and improve from there

>>106188052
>says "ironic" without any clue what it means
>actually just means "no u"

>>106188330
>if it able to beat chess why no smart?
>if it able to discuss physics why not smart?
same thing, turns out neither of these are an absolute measure intelligence

>>106188330
True, neuromorphic processors are the future and Intel abandoned them while in the lead.