Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by suddenlybananas 359 days ago
>surpassing quite some humans

I don't really think this is true, unless you'd be willing to say calculators are smarter than humans (or else you're a misanthrope who would do well to actually talk to other people).

2 comments

idk, if you try something like o3-pro, it's definitely smarter than a lot of people I know, for most definitions of "smarter"

Even the chatgpt voice mode is an okay conversation partner, and that's v1 of s2s

variance is still very high, but there is every indication that it will get better

will it surpass cutting edge researchers soon? I don't think in the next 2 years, but in the next 10 I don't feel confident one way or the other

OK, go ahead: Write a 10 page reasonably well-researched and sourced report on the political situation in the Netherlands in the past 20 years. You have 15 minutes.

The various 'deep research' tools available today can do this. You can't. AI already surpasses you (and me) in this task. Now think about the result after asking less intellectually capable people to do this.

Before you start balking about "hallucinations", pick some country you know about and ask a similar question to Google Gemini (2.5 Flash, and enable 'Deep Research'). Check the results and reconsider your 'calculator' straw man and 'misanthrope' ad hominem.

Yes, and a calculator can add 104123412341235+243524352435 much faster than I can.

>Check the results and reconsider your 'calculator' straw man and 'misanthrope' ad hominem.

How is the calculator a strawman? What is the argument that I am attributing to you that you do not hold?

As for the ad-hominem: I'm glad you don't dispute your misanthropy.

> How is the calculator a strawman? What is the argument that I am attributing to you that you do not hold?

I said: "AI has progressed from being fully inexistent to a level rivaling and surpassing quite some humans in quite some things in less than 100 years"

You attacked the intentionally inane (which is the purpose of a straw man): "Calculators are better at all humans in arithmetic, so they are smarter than all humans"

In no way is what I said close to what you attacked.

> As for the ad-hominem: I'm glad you don't dispute your misanthropy.

Sure, double down on your fallacious nonsense instead of opening your mind to reason and engaging with my point in good faith.

I provided properly described evidence for my point. You're stuck in "AI is just some calculator on steroids". Do your 'deep research' assignment before responding.

If you can't tell the difference between a strawman and an analogy, then no wonder you're so impressed by AI.