Found another booster graph about AI 2027

wonder why ‘absolute horizons depend on calibration’ is written in the smallest text at the bottom of the page…

I have unfortunately stumbled upon some nonsense from r/singularity

shockingly, the top comments are calling bs:

”I’m sorry but I think this time line is a load of bull. “Human task duration at 80% success”. How exactly do you put a millenium prize puzzle on such an axis? It doesn’t even make any sense. Whoever is making this chart is just trying to stay relevant but his analysis holds little predictive power.”

They also missed how that graph is measuring software/coding tasks, while the OP was estimating based off math ability, which are two wildly different fields

On the topic, found another chart comparison thing

So I got bored and for some reason decided to look at the AI 2027 prediction grading doc again…and its Claude Mythos rank is just straight up wrong?

To quote the doc: “ The current best 80% time horizon is Mythos Preview at 186 minutes (version 1.1; there is no measurement for version 1.0). The methodology change from TH1.0 to TH1.1 drops the best model as of AI 2027 publication (Claude 3.7 Sonnet) by 2/3 from 15 to 10 minutes. Because we care more about the pace of progress rather than the absolute values, we look at when the AI 2027 trajectory reaches 186*(3/2)=279 minutes. In a central AI-2027-speed trajectory from our AI 2027 timelines model, 279 minutes is achieved in May 2026.”

Except Claude Sonnet wasn’t dropped to 10 minutes, it was dropped to 12. to play devil’s advocate maybe it was updated between then and now? but it doesnt seem like it.

Late addition: managed to find that post

AI safety is mostly a sex cult

the guy who posted this is also a singularity fanatic, but this is a good enough summary

Short answer: no

Long answer: nooooooooo

please let nobody buy it and have it shut down. it’s arguably the patient zero of ai psychosis

thank god. horrid, parasocial site

deleted by creator

The AI-as-aliens metaphor has existed for a lot longer

Reminds me of the Anthropic employee who doesnt wear sunscreen

Potentially already posted here, but here’s a research paper on all the Lean translation errors in the Navier-Stokes proofs

Edit: yeah this very much has been posted here already, 3 times in fact

Anthropic has committed another crime: this time submitting a false tip to the police

they also apparently tried to fill out visas on state department websites

Just got this recommended to me haven’t watched it yet but already let out a sigh

Edit: just watched a little bit of it-its about the HuggingFace hack. sighhhhh

I think its the latter? it says that it selected the target but crashed before it could actually strike said target

Russia used an AI powered drone to kill civilians

It didn’t kill them because it attacked them, it killed them because it crashed into a wall and exploded.

Russian operators reportedly programmed the drone to fly toward a gas station, where its onboard system selected a target, most likely propane tanks. Before reaching them, however, the drone crashed into a wall and exploded, killing all three civilians.

Somehow this is worthy of a Terminator comment

on slubstack: MIT publishes a paper that proves LLM scaling has a hard ceiling contains a 7 minute video

AI models do not have any of the capabilities needed for recursive-self improvement

Anthropic should be completely embarrassed of themselves