-1

If today was ten years ago, this article would be excellent science fiction. It’s long, and written by someone I’d like to punch in the head, but it’s gotta be read and I couldn’t stop.

Anyone who wants to debunk it, tell me it’s all wrong, I’d sure appreciate that so please do, because it reads like the end of everything.

This is different from every previous wave of automation, and I need you to understand why. AI isn’t replacing one specific skill. It’s a general substitute for cognitive work. It gets better at everything simultaneously. When factories automated, a displaced worker could retrain as an office worker. When the internet disrupted retail, workers moved into logistics or services. But AI doesn’t leave a convenient gap to move into. Whatever you retrain for, it’s improving at that too.

… Imagine it’s 2027. A new country appears overnight. 50 million citizens, every one smarter than any Nobel Prize winner who has ever lived. They think 10 to 100 times faster than any human. They never sleep. They can use the internet, control robots, direct experiments, and operate anything with a digital interface. What would a national security advisor say?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Also, let me point out they didn't properly grade the bar exam: https://www.livescience.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/gpt-4-didnt-ace-the-bar-exam-after-all-mit-research-suggests-it-barely-passed

It did excellent on the multiple choice section, but so would literally any law student using Google.

And that's not the only lie. It can't even repeat stuff we already know. I occasionally give a model one of my own, by new decades old, papers without the abstract and conclusions and asked what it could conclude. It got it completely wrong. Like not-even-funny wrong, wrong conclusions, wrong theory, wrong methodology.

It's pretty fun to see AI boosters get upset at that and blame my paper for the LLM saying literally the opposite of what it says.

this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2026
-1 points (40.0% liked)

AMUSING, INTERESTING, OUTRAGEOUS, or PROFOUND

2972 readers
100 users here now

This is a page for anything that's amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.

♦ ♦ ♦

RULES

❶ Each player gets six cards, except the player on the dealer's right, who gets seven.

❷ Posts, comments, and participants must be amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.

❸ This page uses Reverse Lemmy-Points™, or 'bad karma'. Please downvote all posts and comments.

❹ Posts, comments, and participants that are not amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound will be removed.

❺ This is a non-smoking page. If you must smoke, please click away and come back later.

❻ Don't be a dick.

Please also abide by the instance rules.

♦ ♦ ♦

Can't get enough? Visit my blog.

♦ ♦ ♦

Please consider donating to Lemmy and Lemmy.World.

$5 a month is all they ask — an absurdly low price for a Lemmyverse of news, education, entertainment, and silly memes.

 

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS