←back to thread

AGI Is Still 30 Years Away – Ege Erdil and Tamay Besiroglu

(www.dwarkesh.com)
174 points Philpax | 4 comments | 17 Apr 25 16:42 UTC | HN request time: 0.601s | source
Show context
codingwagie ◴[17 Apr 25 17:29 UTC] No.43719845[source]▶
I just used o3 to design a distributed scheduler that scales to 1M+ sxchedules a day. It was perfect, and did better than two weeks of thought around the best way to build this.
replies(8): >>43719906 #>>43720086 #>>43720092 #>>43721143 #>>43721297 #>>43722293 #>>43723047 #>>43727685 #
timeon ◴[17 Apr 25 19:45 UTC] No.43721297[source]▶
I'm not sure what is your point in context of AGI topic.
replies(1): >>43721320 #
codingwagie ◴[17 Apr 25 19:47 UTC] No.43721320[source]▶
im a tenured engineer, spent a long time at faang. was casually beat this morning by a far superior design from an llm.
replies(1): >>43721517 #
1. darod ◴[17 Apr 25 20:00 UTC] No.43721517[source]▶
is this because the LLM actually reasoned on a better design or because it found a better design in its "database" scoured from another tenured engineer.
replies(2): >>43721581 #>>43721589 #
2. anthonypasq ◴[17 Apr 25 20:06 UTC] No.43721581[source]▶
who cares?
replies(1): >>43722135 #
3. ben_w ◴[17 Apr 25 20:06 UTC] No.43721589[source]▶
Does it matter if the thing a submarine does counts as "swimming"?

We get paid to solve problems, sometimes the solution is to know an existing pattern or open source implementation and use it. Aguably it usually is: we seldom have to invent new architectures, DSLs, protocols, or OSes from scratch, but even those are patterns one level up.

Whatever the AI is inside, doesn't matter: this was it solving a problem.

4. awkwardpotato ◴[17 Apr 25 20:57 UTC] No.43722135[source]▶
Ignoring the copyright issues, credit issues, and any ethical concerns... this approach doesn't work for anything not in the "database", it's not AGI and the tangential experience is barely relevant to the article.