"Can you add 55 to 66 and explain how you reached that output result"

And received this answer:

"55 + 66 = 121.

Add the tens: 50 + 60 = 110. Add the ones: 5 + 6 = 11. Combine them: 110 + 11 = 121."

Do you mean something else? Do humans do something better than this?

Regardless, the result is still valid as the original benchmark harness is definitely unreasonably handicapped, and if a harness alone can help the LLM saturate the benchmark with a near perfect score then the combination of the two must still be effectively AGI in the sense of passing the most famous benchmark designed specifically to measure AGI progress, after multiple iterations of progressively making it harder.

I think it is fair to say that this is probably effectively AGI if the benchmarks are remotely accurate - even with Fable, I've been at the point personally where I am reasonably confident that there's essentially nothing that I am better than Fable at despite generally being substantively above average on human benchmarks. If Astra's this much better than Fable, I'm ready to call AGI here.

For the many people who resist the AGI label possibly ever being achieved, I'd be curious to hear takes on what would make you think Astra is yet to be AGI, and what would still need to be achieved for this to effectively be AGI from this point forward.

Have you tried smaller quantized open weight models that aren’t frontier? They probably can’t automate all your coding but I imagine they could at least help a lot with the drudge work that just takes a lot of time but isn’t necessarily complex?

Definitely curious if anyone is actually doing this fully by hand and if so, why!

When was the last time you wrote an actual meaningful line of code yourself by hand?

Anyone here not using LLMs at all? Curious to see the spectrum of answers and rationales here!

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48931967

Points: 4

# Comments: 15

Found this to be the most compelling and best written AI doomer take, and I’ve yet to find a strong counterargument. Posting this in part to source counterarguments. Anyone have any good ones?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47320011

Points: 6

# Comments: 2

On my 64 GB M1 Macbook Pro right now, I have 53.41 GB of Memory Used and 10.72 GB of Cached Files and 6.08 GB of swap, but Memory Pressure is green and extremely low. On my 8 GB M1 Macbook Air I just bought for OpenClaw, I'm at 6.94 GB Memory Used and 1.01 GB of Cached Files with 2.05 GB of Swap Used, and Memory Pressure is medium high at yellow, probably somewhere around 60-70%.

You can open up the Terminal and run the command memory_pressure to get much more detailed data on what goes into calculating memory pressure - more than just the amount of swap used, it tracks swap I/O and a bunch of page and compressor data to get a more holistic sense of what's going on and how memory starved you're going to feel in practice.

In any case - I've been absolutely mindblown at how fast my 3 8GB M1 Macbook Airs I just bought for ~$350 brand new have been - even with tons of Chrome tabs open, multiple terminal windows open, running OpenClaw and Claude Code and VS Code and doing a ton of development and testing, never once have they ever felt slow. Oftentimes they actually feel faster than my 64 GB M1 Macbook Pro, which kind of blows my mind and makes me wonder wtf is going on on my monster machine. Moreover, my M1 Macbook Pro drains battery like crazy and uses a ton of charge, whereas the Macbook Airs stay constantly below 10 watts essentially always and even with Amphetamine keeping them on 24/7, with the display off and being fully on, they'll drop to a single watt of power draw. Truly insane stuff. I've lost all my concern about RAM, to be honest (which is shocking coming from someone who bought a top of the line maxed out RAM primary machine in 2021 specifically because I felt like RAM was so important)

No one masks at birth. If you want your child to stop masking, perhaps it’s helpful to investigate what caused them to learn the behavior in the first place and what could be done to make the experience of being unmasked more pleasant and less aversive for him.

Just as you say, masking takes an incredible amount of energy and is exhausting and often backfires. Why would anyone expend such exhausting amounts of energy without some extremely strong motivating factor? The alternative to not masking must be perceived as exquisitely undesirable.

"At week 6, remission in the ketamine arm remained high, although non-significantly versus placebo (69.5% v 56.3%; odds ratio 0.8 (95% confidence interval 0.3 to 2.5), P=0.7)."

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22981147

Points: 2

# Comments: 3

Aside: this thread escalated quickly from scamming Apple gift cards on reddit

From the futurism post https://futurism.com/the-byte/scientists-rats-drive-tiny-car...

Seems like a terrible control imo for me to say driving intrinsically has a relaxing effect. A better control would be rats doing nothing vs rats driving and seeing if the rats doing nothing were more stressed than the driving rats, meaning the driving rats were actually lowering their baseline stress.

In this experiment the control of being a passenger in a terrifying vehicle moving all by itself with no autonomy or control over the situation can quite likely be the thing causing elevated stress, rather than rats driving depressing levels of stress. Imagine if someone suddenly strapped you into a bubble that started moving by itself and you have no idea why this is happening, no control over the situation, or where you're going or what's going to happen to you. Stressful af. Hell, people get stressed just being in the passenger seat watching someone else drive.

The vast majority of people prefer having autonomy and control over their own motion vs being helplessly navigated by someone else you don't know/trust with zero context and no idea what's going on. A little misleading if this reflects the actual study.

"Of just over 200 released, six have faced new charges, but only one has been convicted of a new crime, contempt. That’s less than a 3 percent recidivism rate. “When you’re looking at the percentages of the guys who’ve come back in court, and compare that to our overall, which is around 40 percent, you really know you’ve done a good job,” Johnson said.

That outcome supports a theory the U.S. Supreme Court first advanced in 2005, when it outlawed the death penalty for juveniles. The Court took stock of “evolving standards of decency,” as well as a growing body of neuroscience suggesting kids’ immaturity makes them less culpable than adults. It also emphasized that kids, more than adults, are amenable to change. The low recidivism rates likely also reflect the reality that criminal behavior declines dramatically as people age out of their teens and early 20s."

There are a million things incredibly unwise things I would have been far more likely to do at 17 than 27 now - I imagine this is a trend that will continue to likely progress for me individually, and I also imagine this isn't a phenomenon singular to myself.

The shockingly low recidivism rate seems to empirically support this notion as well, particularly when contrasted with the general recidivism rate. If these juvenile offenders were just as culpable as anyone else when they had committed their life sentence crimes, presumably their recidivism rate should be similar. 40 percent for the general population and 3 percent for this cohort so far suggests otherwise.