⚡️🌱🌙's avatar
⚡️🌱🌙 Stu@stuartellison.com 2 years ago
I’m not sure what you are saying? We know exactly how long it’s been going on, we know the full timeline from AlexNET to today. Nobody is going to pay for capabilities that are inferior and more restricted than stuff that is free. There isn’t a market for monolithic AGI because freemium parallel specialisation is outperforming it. Tesla should be worried too. Their monolithic FSD is the same white elephant. It’s only 3 meals from obsolete. Quite easy to imagine discrete open source specialisations that combine to give autonomous navigation / control capabilities that can handle complex environments. An ant can navigate busy traffic without incident. The assumption that you can maintain a proprietary machine intelligence superiority in any domain is just a bad assumption. Monoliths are exponentially more costly to improve as they scale. Whereas mass parallel specialists have linear costs.
↑ Parent

Replies (1)

Default avatar
nobody 2 years ago
people pay for inferior products all the time. because they're manipulated into the "deal cycle". thus they pay 3 times: once for the initial, once for the mistake, and again for a reparation. but full realization is required for the recognition of need and that isn't possible without honesty. assumptions are ridiculous. if you're scaling anything at this time, you're not paying attention, and a parallel narrative is useless if it's still treated as if they will remain parallel indefinitely. discrete why and for whom? what's the point of sneaky dev? that's why ai models are so warped. but corporate processes bank on admission being enough - they rarely fix what they assume will pay off long term. arrogance doubles down - strategy focuses on policy and depth. it's impossible to fake unregulated, honesty. that's why literal disclosure will always confound and outpace sneak-protocol.
↑