zlacker

> If science continues undisrupted, the chance of unaided machines outperforming humans in every possible task was estimated at 10% by 2027, and 50% by 2047.

Maybe I'm overly optimistic (or pessimistic depending on your point of view, I suppose), but 50% by 2047 seems low to me. That just feels like an eternity of development, and even if we maintain the current pace (let alone see it accelerate as AI contributes more to its own development), it's difficult for me to imagine what humans will still be better able to do than AI in over a decade.

I do wonder if the question is ambiguously phrased and some people interpreted it as pure AI (i.e. just bits) while others answered it with the assumption that you'd also have to have the sort of bipedal robot enabled with AI that would allow it to take on all the manual tasks humans do.

>>idopms+(OP)
Yeah, it really comes down to the question of how we advance on just-bits vs constrained-environment robotics vs open-domain robotics...

Some interesting work here on using LLMs to improve on open-domain robotics: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2023/03/embod...

>>idopms+(OP)
What is the "current pace". Last year? Last 5 years? Last 20 years?

If you mean the last year, is that pace maintainable?

>>idopms+(OP)
If you gave print outs of discussions with GPT-4 to AI researchers 5 years ago, they would have told you conversation like that is 10 or 20 years out.

>>idopms+(OP)
I'm of the opposite opinion. I think there's some Dunning-Kruger-like effect at play on a macro scale and it's causing researchers to feel like they're closer than they are because they're in uncharted territory and can't see the complexity of what they're trying to build.

Or maybe I'm just jaded after a couple decades of consistently underbidding engineering and software projects :)

edit: Fix typo

>>idopms+(OP)
a single number as percentage is not useful here.. Intense video games ? of course.. plumbing professionals in a city ? not even close.. etc

>>bcrosb+A2
> If you mean the last year, is that pace maintainable?

That is the question, though I'd turn it around on you - over the course of human history, the speed of progress has been ever-increasing. As AI develops, it is itself a new tool that should increase the speed of progress. Shouldn't our base case be the assumption that progress will speed up, rather than to question whether it's maintainable?