How far are we from AI recreating EQ99?

[OriginalContentGuy]

I still don't believe you are arguing in good faith. Not everyone does.

If we are going to discuss revenue then we must discuss money. Is this correct? If so, then by the same reasoning, If we are to discuss money, then we must discuss energy.

Do you accept this as accurate?

If not, then neither can I assist you presently, nor do I know or care if thar's what you want to happen.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by BradZax [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

5 years ago you could have said the exact same thing about LLMs just not being mathematically possible to get to the level they were 3 years ago.

We're handicapped right now not with how much power it can use, or how much power it can process etc.

We're handicapped with:

It wants more power, it can use more power, but that power is just too expensive to be worth it commercially right now.

Right, before the LLMs we have today were impossible (with a reasonable amount of processing power). Innovation changed that and we got LLMs.

It's like with airplanes, you didn't go from leaving the ground to circumnavigating the globe: it took many separate inventions.

But, there were periods, often many years, between those inventions. When the Wright brothers first flew, some people were like "I'll be flying to China tomorrow!". Those people were very wrong.

AI will get better, no doubt, but no one can predict innovation timelines. And without some new invention, AI will never make EQ.

[BradZax]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Right, before the LLMs we have today were impossible (with a reasonable amount of processing power). Innovation changed that and we got LLMs.

It's like with airplanes, you didn't go from leaving the ground to circumnavigating the globe: it took many separate inventions.

But, there were periods, often many years, between those inventions. When the Wright brothers first flew, some people were like "I'll be flying to China tomorrow!". Those people were very wrong.

AI will get better, no doubt, but no one can predict innovation timelines.

Sure, but I am not predicting that timeline.

Im arguing that trillions of dollars being invested into a timeline that has no predictability wouldn't make sense unless everyone in the world went mad at the same time.

It took the airplane industry 50 years to go from paper and wood to nuclear intercontinental space traveling rockets.

People worked on flight for melinia, and then after someone figures out lift, suddenly we're riding on busses in the sky.

It's hard to predict where we'll be in the near future, but one thing is for sure the same people that told me that AI was going to crush human creativity and I was evil for supporting it, are now the same ones saying that we're stupid for thinking AI has a lot of untapped potential.

And without some new invention, AI will never make EQ

This is objectively false though. More power would allow modern technology to do this.

Unless you're going to make arguments like, a new invention is a new way to put transistors onto a computer chip, or building a space fairing data center.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by BradZax [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Sure, but I am not predicting that timeline.

Im arguing that trillions of dollars being invested into a timeline that has no predictability wouldn't make sense unless everyone in the world went mad at the same time.

Predicting its around the corner, or a long way off is both a wild guess.

It took the airplane industry 50 years to go from paper and wood to nuclear intercontinental space traveling rockets.

People worked on flight for melinia, and then after someone figures out lift, suddenly we're riding on busses in the sky.

It's hard to predict where we'll be in the near future, but one thing is for sure the same people that told me that AI was going to crush human creativity, are now the same ones saying that we're stupid for thinking AI is a valuable tool.

Think of the metaverse. Facebook bet everything on VR becoming ubiquitous in a decade, to the point where they changed their company name. I don't see anyone using the metaverse in 2026.

Technology can plateau, and the companies who heavily invested in AI are not going to simply tell everyone AI may have plateaued. It would crater their investments.

I don't forsee current LLM's being the future of AI. Hopefully the amount of money put into AI will yield a better AI model, but AI could end up being the next plateaued technology like VR.

[BradZax]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Think of the metaverse. Facebook bet everything on VR becoming ubiquitous in a decade, to the point where they changed their company name. I don't see anyone using the metaverse in 2026.

Technology can plateau, and the companies who heavily invested in AI are not going to simply tell everyone AI may have plateaued. It would crater their investments.

I don't forsee current LLM's being the future of AI. Hopefully the amount of money put into AI will yield a better AI model, but AI could end up being the next plateaued technology like VR.

Yeah i agree, but that was FACEBOOKs bet, not "every company in the world"

Not: every hardware manufacturer, and every technology investor.

WAY more investors did not invest in metaverse, than did.

More people have left the VR space than entered it in the time that meta was investing heavily in their vision for the future of their own company.

While the opposite is true about AI, year after year.

And remember, right now we're severely limited on power!

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by BradZax [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yeah i agree, but that was FACEBOOKs bet, not "every company in the world"

Not: every hardware manufacturer, and every technology investor.

WAY more investors did not invest in metaverse, than did.

More people have left the VR space than entered it in the time that meta was investing heavily in their vision for the future of their own company.

More investment does not equate to more smart people knowing the future. I brought up VR because multiple technologies in recent times have had this pattern:

1. A leap in the technology
2. A mass investment into the technology to be the first company to corner the market
3. Pleateau

Cryptocurrency is another technology that did this. Bitcoin came out in 2009, and it is still just a speculative market. You don't see a mass adoption of cryptocurrency as a primary method of payment.

[BradZax]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

More investment does not equate to more smart people knowing the future. I brought up VR because multiple technologies in recent times have had this pattern:

1. A leap in the technology
2. A mass investment into the technology to be the first company to corner the market
3. Pleateau

Cryptocurrency is another technology that did this. Bitcoin came out in 2009, and it is still just a speculative market. You don't see a mass adoption of cryptocurrency as a primary method of payment.

No, Crypto didnt. It took over a decade for any of these companies to invest in crypto.

Also crypto flattens your argument: Because there was an actual return on crypto investments.

And in many high profile cases 10-100x their investments.

That is FULL STOP not the case for AI investment.

There is no revenue being made, yet year after year, there are 10x the investment.

No product to "invest" in.

The argument that is being made is across the internet is, former anti AI people who thought it would crush the human spirit, now think that all the people building it are stupid idiots and the AI can't do anything.

Crypto crashed, when it became a non interesting product to sell to people.

AI could crash if it provides a non interesting product, but up until now, it hasn't even offered a product!

And its going full steam ahead!

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by BradZax [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No, Crypto didnt. It took over a decade for any of these companies to invest in crypto.

Also crypto flattens your argument: Because there was an actual return on crypto investments.

And in many high profile cases 10-100x their investments.

That is FULL STOP not the case for AI investment.

There is no revenue being made, yet year after year, there are 10x the investment.

No product to "invest" in.

The argument that is being made is across the internet is, former anti AI people who thought it would crush the human spirit, now think that all the people building it are stupid idiots and the AI can't do anything.

Crypto crashed, when it became a non interesting product to sell to people.

AI could crash if it provides a non interesting product, but up until now, it hasn't even offered a product!

And its going full steam ahead!

Return on investment and investment itself is irrelevant to the state of the technology. The technology around crypto hasn't made large amounts of progress. That was my point. The technology has largely plateaued, and people are just coasting on the speculative returns.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by BradZax [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is objectively false though. More power would allow modern technology to do this.

Unless you're going to make arguments like, a new invention is a new way to put transistors onto a computer chip, or building a space fairing data center.

No, you're still not understanding. Let's say you pay someone to level your toon. Each new level takes more time, so it costs more money. Up to 20 you can pay them for a level a day, but after that they take multiple days to level.

You can get a new job that pays more, and then you can afford to pay for faster leveling. This is current AI.

But now you want a live toon instead, max level, with all AAs. It doesn't matter if you pay your player more, they still can't get you a level 100 with all AAs. It doesn't matter how much money your player gets, he can only play so many hours a day (and at some point he gets sick and quits).

That's getting an AI to make something like EQ. Throw the very best models at it, give them their own personal nuclear reactor even ... they still won't be able to do it. New tech is required, not just better-powered existing tech.

[Kich867]

Originally Posted by BradZax [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

These guys know what they are doing.

Why would you ever assume that.