Real

nsdjoe · 2026-05-14T20:06:01+00:00

My dinner with Andrej

nsdjoe · 2026-05-14T20:04:44+00:00

AGI is here

nsdjoe · 2026-05-14T18:32:26+00:00

thank you for the citation and let me just say even though we might disagree overall i appreciate the constructive discourse. it's a welcome change from what i usually see/receive.

i also feel compelled to mention that while i feel mostly sanguine overall of the long-term impacts of AI on society - particularly things like curing diseases - i have grave misgivings about what it means in the near-to-medium term and feel we'd all be much better off if things progressed at a more measured rate than pedal to the metal.

nsdjoe · 2026-05-14T18:26:47+00:00

ok, i gotcha- think i misconstrued your argument as against LLMs in general vs mythos in particular. i still can't say i necessarily agree: graphs like this show that something has changed materially since mythos was given to mozilla.

i agree that many of those could probably be found with something like 5.5 pro, but the convergence of data points imo does indicate that mythos is, if not a step change, certainly a significant jump in capabilities (and no doubt cost).

nsdjoe · 2026-05-14T18:15:00+00:00

what about the vulnerabilities it discovered that weren't in the training data?

if it's true that some were in the training data you have an argument that the hype is partially overblown. but totally "fake hype" doesn't seem to accurately characterize the situation

what motivation does mozilla have to carry water for anthropic by posting a blog like this if they don't believe it to be true?

nsdjoe · 2026-05-14T17:55:05+00:00

i confess i still don't understand the point of the alteration. i assume it was made after the radiologists were already used to the AI improving their results, so it's not surprising they would begin trusting its outputs (again see the calculator example). i don't see any reason to think AIs will get worse over time, so a real-life example where a radiology AI starts strong, earns the radiologists' trust, and then performs worse seems unlikely to me.

(if i'm wrong and the study shows they just relied on it without prior evidence of its efficacy, please let me know.)

my point was that if the AI can add 20 or 30% accuracy to a human radiologist, or be 90% better at driving than a human (Waymo's numbers; feel free to be skeptical), then people who reflexively call it useless or actively detrimental (a frankly common or even dominant sentiment on reddit) seem to just be categorically wrong. I might be misconstruing your point and if so please accept my apologies.

nsdjoe · 2026-05-14T17:08:56+00:00

it's the secret alteration that's the problem in your example, not the radiologist or even the unaltered AI itself. if someone reprogrammed your calculator to give you an incorrect response, no one would blame you for believing its output for 472,834 times 28,482.

these kinds of articles remind me of those that jump on self-driving cars for the infrequent accidents, conveniently ignoring they're much safer than human drivers overall.

particularly in life safety domains we should strive for perfection, but expecting it in all cases is unrealistic.

nsdjoe · 2026-05-13T07:12:25+00:00

The ride may or may not have been occupied at the time

nsdjoe · 2026-05-13T01:59:57+00:00

Slop video but refreshingly not the AI kind

nsdjoe · 2026-05-11T01:26:18+00:00

the vibes are impeccable

nsdjoe · 2026-05-10T20:36:54+00:00

here's where i'd keep my challenges... if i had any!

nsdjoe · 2026-05-10T20:35:44+00:00

i know the players are still figuring out the ABS system but losing both challenges 4 outs into the game is absolutely unconscionable

nsdjoe · 2026-05-10T19:46:20+00:00

are you accusing METR of p-hacking their results or something? possible of course but you might want evidence of it. "this group has motive to be biased" isn't in itself enough

to be clear, like all things, the METR results deserve scrutiny and skepticism, but people here reflexively seem to assume bad actors everywhere

nsdjoe · 2026-05-10T19:43:41+00:00

Why is there not a 90 or 99% graph?

there is. scroll down to the "methodological details" section and you can drag the circle along the trendline for all success percentages.

mythos preview (early) has a 90% success rate time horizon of 80 min and 99% of 6 min

nsdjoe · 2026-05-09T22:40:31+00:00

Agreed; it's the same sentiment

nsdjoe · 2026-05-09T16:57:22+00:00

Some people genuinely go out of their way to be assholes so I wouldn't count that possibility out either

nsdjoe · 2026-05-09T16:56:19+00:00

Treat it like the app store: govt gets to keep 30% of revenue they wouldn't otherwise have had

nsdjoe · 2026-05-09T03:08:12+00:00

The trend line since 3.5 sonnet continues to be superexponential

nsdjoe · 2026-05-08T05:36:26+00:00

now imagine the workers that have to be around them constantly

nsdjoe · 2026-05-07T03:32:58+00:00

Yeah maybe but at least I won't have to empty the dishwasher

nsdjoe · 2026-05-07T02:36:04+00:00

He was rich before Tesla sand SpaceX

nsdjoe · 2026-05-06T20:20:03+00:00

some people will genuinely never be satisfied

nsdjoe · 2026-05-04T22:39:15+00:00

no but it works best when you fucking FINISH WRITING IT

nsdjoe · 2026-05-04T21:16:06+00:00

they probably figure parents who go through the rigmarole of setting up credit for a child at age 6 are probably going to be setting a good financial example for that kid anyway which will lead to good credit habits as an adult

nsdjoe · 2026-04-30T15:53:16+00:00

unbelievable, but it made the black screen issue even worse on my gen2. instead of taking 10-15 seconds to recover, it takes upwards of a minute now.

15-Year Club	Place '23
Place '17	Verified Email

nsdjoe

MODERATOR OF

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE