If you’re thinking of the list that I’m thinking of: that is completely unfounded. They started with the premise “AI will be perfect in 2 years” and then drew a graph that looked good-ish. There is no scientific value to it.
If you’re thinking of the list that I’m thinking of: that is completely unfounded. They started with the premise “AI will be perfect in 2 years” and then drew a graph that looked good-ish. There is no scientific value to it.
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 18 hours ago
Valid, but no matter what the timeline, it’s going to improve over time, and companies are already committed to it, so they’ll be prioritizing continuing R&D until it does what they want it to.
It’s coming whether we like it or not, and it’s going to be a bloodbath no matter what the final scenario is. Either the workers take the hit, or the companies do, and if the companies do, then the workers will take the hit anyway.
The workers are screwed no matter what.
smiletolerantly@awful.systems 18 hours ago
Counterpoint: LLMs are a dead-end for AGI. And outsourcing tasks to a “sometimes correct, but very often wrong” bot starts looking like a not-so-good idea once you actually need to pay for the compute.
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 17 hours ago
Valid, but that’s part of what I mean. If it finally works the way they want it to, welcome to a 75+% permanent unemployment rate, and the worker is screwed. But if it doesn’t work, the bubble pops, and the entire economy crashes, and the workers is screwed.
We’re screwed.