... and in the meantime people are looking at their AI bills and realizing tokens aren't worth what they cost. The frontier is getting the cost down, not getting intelligence up. In a cage match between this guy and "Ed", Ed wins.

"It is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism"

Nah, screw that. I won't be waiting that long. I'll be 61 in 2040. I'd love humanity to take a shot at clinical immortality way sooner.

This is the same nonsense as before except now they are pushing out their prediction by 3 years. This is just fear mongering fan fiction.

They are also claiming that China may go to war with the US if our AI is better than theirs. They are coming up with scary scenarios which realistically won't happen.

>The problem with an intelligence explosion is the "explosion" part.

It's not a literal explosion. If we explosively ended world hunger that would be a good thing. Similar to having an abundance of food for everyone, having an abundance of intelligence is wildly beneficial to society. The article doesn't mention it but an explosion isn't guaranteed we could just see a plateau of capabilities due to bottlenecks of resources needed to power AI, time needed to run AI, and limited interaction with the real world. AI can't run science experiments on its own by the 2030 doomsday timeline

[flagged]

[flagged]

[dead]

[flagged]

[dead]

[flagged]