It's not wrong, but I find the underlying corrolay pretty creepy that actually trying to understand those problems and fix errors at edge cases is also a fool's errand, because why try to understand a specific behavior if you can just (try to) finetune it away?
So we'll have to get used for good to a future where AI is unpredictable, usually does what you want, but has a 0.1% chance of randomly going haywire and no one will know how to fix it?
Also, the focus on hardware seems to imply that it's strictly a game of capital - who has access to the most compute resources wins, the others can stop trying. Wouldn't this lead to massive centralization?
So we'll have to get used for good to a future where AI is unpredictable, usually does what you want, but has a 0.1% chance of randomly going haywire and no one will know how to fix it?
Also, the focus on hardware seems to imply that it's strictly a game of capital - who has access to the most compute resources wins, the others can stop trying. Wouldn't this lead to massive centralization?