> Unlike previous hype cycles, the potential value of this one is extraordinary if it’s actually unlocked
That was also true, in AI, of the expert-system hype cycle. And the actual value unlocked was extraordinary, just not at the scale people saw as the potential.
Actually, it was seen as true of all of the hype cycles during the hype cycle, that's what makes it a hype cycle.
> (I mean, what was the theoretical upper limit on the benefit of cryptocurrency for the world? Probably not that much.)
If you believed the people that were as breathless about it as you are about the current AI hype cycle, basically infinite, unlocking ways human potential and interactions, economic and otherwise, are held back by centralized and/or authoritarian systems.
That's what made it a hype cycle.
> It’s quite possible that we already have sufficient computational power and the necessary data for AGI—all we need are the right algorithms.
Yeah, but that's always been true. If software-only AGI is possible, we've always had the data in the natural world, and with no strong theoretical model for the necessary computational power, its always been possible we had enough. What we clearly lacked were the right algorithms (oh, and any reason to believe software-only AGI was possible.)
That was also true, in AI, of the expert-system hype cycle. And the actual value unlocked was extraordinary, just not at the scale people saw as the potential.
Actually, it was seen as true of all of the hype cycles during the hype cycle, that's what makes it a hype cycle.
> (I mean, what was the theoretical upper limit on the benefit of cryptocurrency for the world? Probably not that much.)
If you believed the people that were as breathless about it as you are about the current AI hype cycle, basically infinite, unlocking ways human potential and interactions, economic and otherwise, are held back by centralized and/or authoritarian systems.
That's what made it a hype cycle.
> It’s quite possible that we already have sufficient computational power and the necessary data for AGI—all we need are the right algorithms.
Yeah, but that's always been true. If software-only AGI is possible, we've always had the data in the natural world, and with no strong theoretical model for the necessary computational power, its always been possible we had enough. What we clearly lacked were the right algorithms (oh, and any reason to believe software-only AGI was possible.)