There’s a significant difference between predicting what it will specifically look like, and predicting sets of possibilities it won’t look like
> Five years from now AI might still break down at even a small bit of complexity, or it might be installing air conditioners, or it might be colonizing Mercury and putting humans in zoos.
do all these seem logically consistent possibilities to you?
> AI might still break down at even a small bit of complexity, or it might be installing air conditioners, or it might be colonizing Mercury and putting humans in zoos.
that each of these things, being logically consistent, have equal chances of being the case 5 years from now?
>There’s a significant difference between predicting what it will specifically look like, and predicting sets of possibilities it won’t look like
which I took to mean there are probability distributions around what things will happen, and it seemed to be your assertion that there wasn't, that a number of things only one of which seemed especially probable, were equally probable. I'm glad to learn you don't think this as it seems totally crazy, especially for someone praising LLMs which after all spend their time making millions of little choices based on probability.