phil917

I would bet to be ready before the Superbowl ads

So many of the writer's issues with students today are things I did myself a good amount when I was in college around 15 years ago at this point. I skipped classes all the time and I was often browsing the web on my phone / laptop even if I did goto class.

If I'm being honest, a lot of my professors (perhaps a big majority even) were just bad teachers and I got much more value out of the textbook, looking up stuff on the internet, or just tinkering with the at home assignments. I can say with 100% certainty that ChatGPT would have been infinitely more helpful in me learning calculus compared to the professor who taught my class in university.

I also don't really align with the issues he has with students asking for the slide decks used in class. If it can help your students learn the material, the whole purpose of the class, then what's the big deal? This point in particular almost made it seem like he's a bit salty over his students not being deferential enough to him.

All in all, despite doing many of the things that this writer takes issue with when I was in college myself years ago, I have a great career and I'm good at my work. So I think the kids are going to be just fine.

Perhaps, but at that point I feel like I'm spending more time feeding the tool the right prompt and context, going back and forth with corrections, etc... when I could just write the code myself with less time and hassle.

I've definitely had far more success with using AI as a fuzzy search or asking it for one-off pieces of functionality. Any time I ask it to interact directly inside my codebase, it usually fails.

I feel like anytime I try these "agentic" programming tools they always fall on their face.

Devin was pretty bad and honestly soaked up more time than it saved. I've tried Cursor Composer before and came away with bad results. I tried Copilot again just now with o3-mini and it just completely hallucinated up some fields into my project when I asked it to do something...

Am I taking crazy pills or do these tools kinda suck?

"Project Padawan" looks fairly similar to Devin, at least from a user experience perspective. From personal experience, Devin was pretty terrible so we'll see if Microsoft does any better...

Honestly, that demo was pretty weak.

If 2025 is really going to be the “year of agents”, then they need to do better than this.

I can't even properly put into words my hatred for AI generated "music"

The AI hype bros on social media are the actual worst and have done more damage than anything else to how I feel about AI these days.

The grift has been at unbearable levels for months now and it actually drove me to delete my X account recently.

Lol I missed that even though it's literally the first sentence of the blog, good catch.

Yeah, that makes this result a lot less impressive for me.

Yeah I agree that wasn't particularly mind blowing to me and seems fairly in line with what existing SOTA models can do. Especially since they did it in steps. Maybe I'm missing something.

Quote from the creators of the AGI-ARC benchmark: "Passing ARC-AGI does not equate achieving AGI, and, as a matter of fact, I don't think o3 is AGI yet. o3 still fails on some very easy tasks, indicating fundamental differences with human intelligence."

Direct quote from the ARC-AGI blog:

“SO IS IT AGI?

ARC-AGI serves as a critical benchmark for detecting such breakthroughs, highlighting generalization power in a way that saturated or less demanding benchmarks cannot. However, it is important to note that ARC-AGI is not an acid test for AGI – as we've repeated dozens of times this year. It's a research tool designed to focus attention on the most challenging unsolved problems in AI, a role it has fulfilled well over the past five years.

Passing ARC-AGI does not equate achieving AGI, and, as a matter of fact, I don't think o3 is AGI yet. o3 still fails on some very easy tasks, indicating fundamental differences with human intelligence.

Furthermore, early data points suggest that the upcoming ARC-AGI-2 benchmark will still pose a significant challenge to o3, potentially reducing its score to under 30% even at high compute (while a smart human would still be able to score over 95% with no training). This demonstrates the continued possibility of creating challenging, unsaturated benchmarks without having to rely on expert domain knowledge. You'll know AGI is here when the exercise of creating tasks that are easy for regular humans but hard for AI becomes simply impossible.”

The high compute variant sounds like it costed around *$350,000* which is kinda wild. Lol the blog post specifically mentioned how OpenAPI asked ARC-AGI to not disclose the exact cost for the high compute version.

Also, 1 odd thing I noticed is that the graph in their blog post shows the top 2 scores as “tuned” (this was not displayed in the live demo graph). This suggest in those cases that the model was trained to better handle these types of questions, so I do wonder about data / answer contamination in those cases…

Don't forget the massive population decline set to literally halve the population in the next 70 years...

The more Sam Altman posts stuff like this, the more he comes across as a grifter hype man to me

Oh my god I don't know why I never made that connection until now. That is exactly what it feels like!