zlacker

>>tedsan+(OP)
I'm confused and a bit disturbed; honestly having a very difficult time internalizing and processing this information. This announcement is making me wonder if I'm poorly calibrated on the current progress of AI development and the potential path forward. Is the key idea here that current AI development has figured out enough to brute force a path towards AGI? Or I guess the alternative is that they expect to figure it out in the next 4 years...

I don't know how to make sense of this level of investment. I feel that I lack the proper conceptual framework to make sense of the purchasing power of half a trillion USD in this context.

>>TheAce+9g
Let me avoid the use of the word AGI here because the term is a little too loaded for me these days.

1) reasoning capabilities in latest models are rapidly approaching superhuman levels and continue to scale with compute.

2) intelligence at a certain level is easier to achieve algorithmically when the hardware improves. There's also a larger path to intelligence and often simpler mechanisms

3) most current generation reasoning AI models leverage test time compute and RL in training--both of which can make use of more compute readily. For example RL on coding against compilers proofs against verifiers.

All of this points to compute now being basically the only bottleneck to massively superhuman AIs in domains like math and coding--rest no comment (idk what superhuman is in a domain with no objective evals)

>>Davidz+7m
> 1) reasoning capabilities in latest models are rapidly approaching superhuman levels and continue to scale with compute.

What would you say is the strongest evidence for this statement?