On a side note, I loved Altman's interview style - he focused on the interviewee instead of soapboxing, which is unfortunately very rare in interviewers.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity
In 1965 I. J. Good predicted an ultraintelligent machine by 2000, Vinge (1993) predicted greater-than-human intelligence between 2005 and 2030, Yudkowsky (1996) predicted a singularity by 2021, and Kurzweil (2005) predicted human-level artificial intelligence by 2030. Moravec (1988) predicted human-level artificial intelligence in supercomputers by 2010 by extrapolating past trend using a chart, while Moravec (1998/1999) predicted human-level artificial intelligence by 2040, and intelligence far beyond human by 2050. In a 2017 interview, Kurzweil predicted human-level intelligence by 2029 and billion fold intelligence and singularity by 2045
Who do you think lied among them?
This is the OP:
Another reminder that Elon Musk routinely lies about timelines. If Mars colonization had followed the timeline laid out here, we'd be three years from having lots of people on Mars.
That said, these largely don’t sound _particularly_ serious?
> Moravec (1988) predicted human-level artificial intelligence in supercomputers by 2010 by extrapolating past trend using a chart
I mean, come on.
> That said, these largely don’t sound _particularly_ serious?
And Musk making prediction about Mars is lying?
Of course, there will always be people that don't, and that's perfectly fine too.
I wasn't claiming that that Musk (or anyone in particular) was lying in my my comment. I was just pointing out that you can, in fact, lie through making speculative statements.
"Tesla indicated that Elon is extrapolating on the rates of improvement when speaking about L5 capabilities. Tesla will not say if the rate of improvement would make it to L5 by end of calendar year."
Cybertruck is entering mass production soon. Yes, it's late, but it's coming.
Same for self driving. It is clearly getting better all the time, and it's coming.
Again, he is often late delivering on very difficult and ambitious things. Have a look how the competition are doing with re-usable rockets, mass producing electric vehicles, self driving, etc.
None of these things are easy, and they take time.
1. You don't have to believe him. 2. We still get some impossible results in the end which leads to a more interesting future.
If we have self-landing rockets you could argue all day about truth and integrity but we'll still have self-landing rockets.
I kinda put him in the same box as Steve Jobs. They are very crappy in some ways, but you cannot argue with what they have achieved.
Would we have a 'space race' like we have now, if it wasn't for Musk? Even Bezos cannot keep up.
How long would the EV 'evolution' have taken if Musk didn't make it a priority?
There are loads of faults here, and I am not blind to them. However, I think its short-sighted to paint his goals as "lies".
Making impossible claims in investor calls, in corporate communications, to be clear, to the point where the company has later had to asterisk said claims as "visionary, not targets".
I mean, electric cars were a thing. Not a big thing. But nonetheless. And FSD is to me a lot less impressive than implied. And on FSD, he has repeatedly well, failed to deliver - "this year, coast to coast, no interventions" is something he's said each and every year since 2016. And it still runs in to the back of stationary emergency lighted vehicles. Until last year it could barely handle roundabouts. It saw level crossings as a weird intersection with a light that was red, and then not, and then red again, with a collection of trucks crossing it.
I'd agree that he's failed to deliver on the FSD so far, but I mean, it'll be such a shift (when either Tesla or some other group nail it which like I said I think is the most likely) that when we look back on it in 100 years we're not going to care how far their time estimates were out by.