This seems particularly apt:
āThe public conversation is confused and chaotic. Hypesters are doing victory laps. Skeptics are still pointing out the things Agent-3-mini canāt do. Everyone knows something big is happening but no one agrees on what it is.ā
Like with bitcoin!
Quite so! I just finished reading through the āRaceā ending. As usual, I find that authors are happy to apply superexponentiation to some things but not others.
For example, in the essay, they imagine AI being turned to fuel faster AI research (plausible). And they posit similar booms in medicine and business (plausible).
But they also posit that the AI couldnāt get out in front of pollution? Seems like an easy problem. And none of the research went into morality, ethics, philosophy? Thatās where it loses me.
Humanity is āthe environmentā of AI, in much the same way that nature is āthe environmentā for humans. It seems logical to me that superintelligent AI would angle for a controlled symbiosis, much as people seek regenerative and sustainable (but controlled) relationships with nature.
