←back to thread

197 points baylearn | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
empiko ◴[] No.44471933[source]
Observe what the AI companies are doing, not what they are saying. If they would expect to achieve AGI soon, their behaviour would be completely different. Why bother developing chatbots or doing sales, when you will be operating AGI in a few short years? Surely, all resources should go towards that goal, as it is supposed to usher the humanity into a new prosperous age (somehow).
replies(9): >>44471988 #>>44471991 #>>44472148 #>>44472874 #>>44473259 #>>44473640 #>>44474131 #>>44475570 #>>44476315 #
rvz ◴[] No.44471991[source]
Exactly. For example, Microsoft was building data centers all over the world since "AGI" was "around the corner" according to them.

Now they are cancelling those plans. For them "AGI" was cancelled.

OpenAI claims to be closer and closer to "AGI" as more top scientists left or are getting poached by other labs that are behind.

So why would you leave if the promise of achieving "AGI" was going to produce "$100B dollars of profits" as per OpenAI's and Microsoft's definition in their deal?

Their actions tell more than any of their statements or claims.

replies(4): >>44472058 #>>44472138 #>>44473043 #>>44474336 #
zaphirplane ◴[] No.44472058[source]
I’m not commenting on the whole just the rhetorical question of why would people leave.

They are leaving for more money, more seniority or because they don’t like their boss. 0 about AGI

replies(3): >>44472121 #>>44472173 #>>44472278 #
1. Touche ◴[] No.44472121[source]
Yeah I agree, this idea that people won't change jobs if they are on the verge of a breakthrough reads like a silicon valley fantasy where you can underpay people by selling them on vision or something. "Make ME rich, but we'll give you a footnote on the Wikipedia page"
replies(1): >>44473769 #
2. LtWorf ◴[] No.44473769[source]
I think you're being very optimistic with the footnote.