Hacker News Reader

>But there is also a more subtle thing, which is we're trending towards superintelligence with these AIs

do you have any evidence for that, though? Besides marketing claims, I mean.

I've always quite liked https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/test-scores-ai-capabiliti... to show that once AIs are knocking at the door of a human capability they tend to overshoot in around a decade.

This is just trash, like almost any AI benchmark. E.g. it says since around 2015 speech recognition is above human yet any any speech input today has more errors than any human would have.

If I would not type but speak this comment maybe 2 to 5 words would be wrong. For a human it is maybe 10% of that.

we have to look at what LLMs are and are not doing for this to be applicable; they are not "thinking", there is no real cognition going on inside an LLM. They are making statistical connections between data points in their training sets. Obviously, that has born some pretty interesting (and sometimes even useful) results but they are not doing anything that any reasonably informed person would call "intelligent" and certainly not "super intelligent".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com