mckirk

What does 'being decent' mean in this context, in your opinion?

True, but afaik none that an AI company itself uses to say 'this is what we think showcases the individual strengths of our models the best'.

Since internally you probably have a fairly good intuition for what these models do well, what about assembling a benchmark suite (with multiple dimensions) that produces results that show that intuition, but in a 'somewhat objective' way?

That could solve the 'more IQ' problem, because you'd actually have different dimensions (e.g. for 'raw intelligence', technical writing, emotional understanding, etc) that you could use to communicate the differences in models better.

(Of course people would instantly start complaining that the benchmarks numbers are probably fake etc, but it is what it is.)

I stopped reading after 'Clearly not'.

It's okay to have a strong opinion on this, but if you suggest the answer is 'clearly anything', I will start to suspect you haven't thought about the problem enough.

Only the funny ones

No, we're pacing ourselves to have the time to evaluate the impact each new model could have, obviously.

That's one legit interpretation, but 'the people working on this are deeply unsettled and truly want to pace because they're afraid of where we're headed' should remain another.

Ohh I'm gonna steal that one.

Although I don't fully agree. With AI the focus now shifts a lot from 'being able to implement the thing' to 'being able to know/figure out exactly what you want the thing to look like', also against the siren song of the LLMs constantly having ideas of what you could _also_ build.

So, I agree that it's not a direct translation from 'pro pizza cook' is 'pro pizza orderer', but I'm quite sure the pro pizza cooks would generally have the better pizzas in the end, if there were infinite variations of pizza on the menu and the ordering agent was constantly trying to upsell you on slathering on another layer of sauce and cheese.

Which is not to say there aren't exceptions in both directions, because as a pro pizza connoisseur you could even be better positioned to 'know exactly what you want', without ever having made a pizza; and as a pro cook you might still be overwhelmed by the ordering process.

Though all of this still assumes of course that we are in the 'complexity region' where we can expect the LLM/the pizza agent to deliver _exactly_ what we wanted, without issue. As soon as we leave that region (though it expands every week, it feels like), the skills of the cook are still very much necessary to make sure things are as they should be, and fix them if not.

"Well a wave hit it"

Why do I get the feeling this 'pacing' will be one of "yeah alright guys, let's pace ourselves while I'm ahead".

LLMs don't need to be the dangerous ASI thing themselves for them to still be dangerous. It suffices if they

- destabilize the world just by what they do: making previously very hard things (generating fake everything, manipulating people, hacking, bio-weapons research) easy enough fast enough that our civilization doesn't cope with it and/or

- accelerate AI research to the point where they make the dangerous ASI thing appear years earlier than would otherwise have happened

Thank you, that is very reassuring to know :D

(and interactions like these are part of the reason why I <3 HN)

(insert meme of multiple Spider-Men pointing at each other here)

> for some reason

I mean, I can think of one reason. Them being quite far away from the ground most of the time, mainly.