[tippytippytango]

Sometimes we get confused by the difference between technological and scientific progress. When science makes progress it unlocks new S-curves that progress at an incredible pace until you get into the diminishing returns region. People complain of slowing progress but it was always slow, you just didn’t notice that nothing new was happening during the exponential take off of the S-curve, just furious optimization.

[baxtr]

Fully agree.

And at the same time I have noticed that people don’t understand the difference between an S-curve and an exponential function. They can look almost identical at certain intervals.

[protocolture]

As far back as 2017 I copped a lot of flak for suggesting that the coming automation revolution will be great at copying office workers and artists but wont be in order of replacing the whole human race. A lot of the time moores law got thrown back in my face. But thats how this works, we unlock something new, we exploit it as far as possible, the shine wears off and we deal with the aftermath.

[Zacharias030]

The crypto mind cannot comprehend

[the_sleaze_]

Something I've come to recognize and deeply resent.

Being Right and being Successful are not the same thing.

[TimByte]

The real trick is recognizing when you're in the thick of engineering polish versus standing on the edge of a new scientific leap

[timewizard]

You're being awfully generous to describe basic hype as "technological progress."

[pevansgreenwood]

That's putting the cart before the horse. Thermodynamics came after the steam engine was made practical. Flight came before aerodynamics. Metallurgy before materials science. Radio before electromagnetic theory took hold. Even LLMs are the result of a lot of tinkering rather than scientific insight. It’s the successful tinkering that creates the puzzle science later formalises.