zlacker

>>laiysb+(OP)
With how stochastic the process is it makes it basically unusable for any large scale task. What's the plan? To roll the dice until the answer pops up? That would be maybe viable if there was a way to automatically evaluate it 100% but with a human in the loop required it becomes untenable.

>>margor+72
The plan is to improve AI agents from their current ~intern level to a level of a good engineer.

>>eterev+J2
Seems like that is taking a very long time, on top of some very grandiose promises being delivered today.

>>ethano+l3
I look back over the past 2-3 years and am pretty amazed with how quick change and progress have been made. The promises are indeed large but the speed of progress has been fast. Not defending the promise but “taking a very long time” does not seem to be an accurate representation.

>>infect+K5
> The promises are indeed large but the speed of progress has been fast

And at the same time, absurdly slow? ChatGPT is almost 3 years old and pretty much AI has still no positive economic impact.

>>owebma+b6
OpenAI alone is on track to generate as much revenue as Asus or US Steel this year ($10-$15 billion). I don't know how you can say AI has had no positive economic impact.

>>derekt+nb
Revenue, not profit.

If it costs them even just one more dollar than that revenue number to provide that service (spoiler, it does), then you could say AI has had no positive economic impact.

Considering we know they’re being subsidized by obscene amounts of investment money just like all other frontier model providers, it seems pretty clear it’s still a negative economic impact, regardless of the revenue number.