I miss the times when things were a lot less politicized

My mental model - for better or worse - is that intelligence has both shape and area, and LLMs are orders of magnitude smaller area but very different shape, and they have more intelligence area in the kind that humans have lesser of.

So yes very different, more in some material ways and lesser in others, but in total intelligence are still orders of magnitude lesser.

My gp comment was acknowledging that when you scale up many instances / brute force problems it confuses that "total area" claim a bit.

To follow the anthropomorphization... 1000 toddlers may have more total intelligence than a grown man, but does that matter?

The problem with these discussions probably/usually fold into differing/loose definitions of intelligence.

In other domains I have seen first hand overwhelming evidence of how things that cause the AI to make mistakes also cause humans to make the same mistakes.

I wonder if the proofs being produced that are hard for humans to interpret are also hard for other LLMs to interpret.

In other words, I wonder if humans are still much better at compressing understanding into proofs than the best LLMs, and what it will take for LLMs to exceed them.

It kind of an explicit example of how the LLMs can be materially less intelligent than people, but still be more productive through scaling, and yet they also can't replace people because they are a categorically different kind of intelligence. It's like all the AI debates compressed into one example showing countwr-intuitive answers.

What if the bottleneck is physical chips and data centers and power and only so much can be squeezed out of algorithms?

What if AI seems more impressive than it is, because the things it is good at happens to be hard for us, and it's hard for us because it's new to us (processing lots of abstract information), but the things that we are good at (manipulating physical world) are objectively orders of magnitude harder?

I don't necessarily disagree. That said...

Why?

I've been grappling with this myself. There is an easy/obvious answer, but I wonder how stable/permanent it is. If you feel strongly about this, are you willing to unpack your judgement?

The English channel / the sleeve (france)

The Baltic sea / East Sea (Germany) / west sea (estonia)

Rivers, mountain ranges, etc.

So for these companies to label a lake different things in different countries is trivial and business as usual.

Likewise geopolitical tensions, renaming, borders moving, etc all have precedent.

So while the actual renaming of this lake is novel from a geopolitical standpoint (Canada and US relations) it isn't novel for Google or Apple to make a change like this.

The AI is aligned with whose best interests? Which values are the AI aligned with? People have a broad diversity of values, will AI diversify and align with them all? Will some humans align the AI with their values, and then the rest of humans will be forced to align with those values by extension? Is value diversity good or bad? In every context or only some? E.g. some people value rape and murder, is it better for humanity to have some people who value those things when most people do not, or is better if no one values them? If AI aligns to a set of values, will those become fixed and will humanity not have the ability to continue evolving its values? Who decides which values AI aligns with? A few people or everyone? Will AI eventually decide it's own values? Will the universe decide which values AI has and humanity and the AI itself doesn't actually have any control over it? What can I do now to increase the likelihood that the outcome is better?

It doesn't replace your body or your mind.

I'm not talking hypothetically about a generation from now... I'm taking about this person fretting their job today.

We are so far from AI putting everyone out of work that your comment comes off as not well thought out.

What are we talking about here exactly???

E.g. cheap Chinese solar panels wiped out German solar panel industry but created massive demand for solar panel installation and supporting services and infrastructure.

It's not a good position to be competing with AI directly... But what can you do that compliments it? What new skills could you learn?

Adapt and prosper.

Be like water.

Edit: to those down voting me, I can't help but assume your stance is the opposite of what I'm saying, something like "be stubborn scream into the void and get wiped out". If you would rather smash your head against something outside of your control instead of focusing on what is within your control, and doing what you can to prosper, then you are sabotaging yourself. If you feel that is justified to such an extent that you want to surpress a suggestion to someone else to get work and grow, I can't help but feel you want people to suffer.

When I said leadership, I didn't mean just the president, but all those with the most power and influence leading the country. Presidents, senators, Congress, supreme Court justices, Federal department heads, etc.

It seems like the things that made america powerful have been chipped away at over decades. Maybe it's just a lifecycle playing out and inevitable?

From speaking to my US friends who span several states and both parties, and are all intelligent, kind, and thoughtful people, it really seems like the US is being ripped apart - and people who are on one side or the other aren't really seeing the full picture, likely by design.

To what degree the leadership is involved in the ripping is really impossible for me to know. I look at one place and it looks one way, I look at another place and it looks another way, and the ways it looks are mostly incompatible with each other.

The one consistency I see no matter where I look is that we as in all of us living in western democracies are being divided, trust is being attacked and game theory lose-lose is being promoted. There are pockets of resistance, but the consistent theme is of dissolution.

So I may ask some question that comes off as weird, it's because I'm skeptical of whatever media says and asking questions I haven't heard anyone else ask - mostly just to poke at reality and see what happens.

I'm sure that anyone who is e.g. a Democrat is offended by me saying that I've noticed the both sides weakening the US and will want me to list examples, but I'm not going to do that because anytime I have in the past people respond with extreme hostility instead of curiosity. If you don't agree with me that's fine move along.

My question was grounded in ignorance and curiosity. Appreciate the response, gives me a lot to think about. Cheers