@climateer.bsky.social
As we learn more about AI progress (o3 scoring 25.2% on the *very* difficult FrontierMath benchmark), views on AGI timelines seem to be diverging, not converging. In a post that was fun to write, I sketch fast and slow timelines and flag some signals to watch for. (Link in 🧵)
January 6, 2025 at 4:47 AM
As we learn more about AI progress (o3 scoring 25.2% on the *very* difficult FrontierMath benchmark), views on AGI timelines seem to be diverging, not converging. In a post that was fun to write, I sketch fast and slow timelines and flag some signals to watch for. (Link in 🧵)
@emollick.bsky.social recently noted the weirdly uneven nature of AI announcements – "Here is a tool to accelerate science. It also talks like Santa". This reflects an underlying reality: AI capabilities and adoption are both wildly uneven. I discuss in my latest post (link below).
December 16, 2024 at 12:51 AM
@emollick.bsky.social recently noted the weirdly uneven nature of AI announcements – "Here is a tool to accelerate science. It also talks like Santa". This reflects an underlying reality: AI capabilities and adoption are both wildly uneven. I discuss in my latest post (link below).
@sebk.bsky.social
identified a key source of disagreement on AI policy: wildly divergent views of AI's impact. Arguments seem to stem from conflicting values – profits and progress vs. safety and status quo. But often, the real disagreement is unstated factual assumptions regarding the future.
identified a key source of disagreement on AI policy: wildly divergent views of AI's impact. Arguments seem to stem from conflicting values – profits and progress vs. safety and status quo. But often, the real disagreement is unstated factual assumptions regarding the future.
November 20, 2024 at 10:54 PM
@sebk.bsky.social
identified a key source of disagreement on AI policy: wildly divergent views of AI's impact. Arguments seem to stem from conflicting values – profits and progress vs. safety and status quo. But often, the real disagreement is unstated factual assumptions regarding the future.
identified a key source of disagreement on AI policy: wildly divergent views of AI's impact. Arguments seem to stem from conflicting values – profits and progress vs. safety and status quo. But often, the real disagreement is unstated factual assumptions regarding the future.