[jcgrillo]

But the things they say they believe are insane and totally unmoored from physical, societal, and economic reality. If they actually believe those things they're untrustworthy because they're delusional. If they don't, they're untrustworthy because they're fraudulent. Either way it's not good..

[reducesuffering]

They're not. They're in the eye of the storm and see what's going on the clearest. They were ahead of the curve to be where they're at now, and they're still ahead of the curve for where we're going. All the other heads of labs like Sam Altman and Demis have been saying the same thing since 2015-2016 way before any of this "marketing" would ever have been at play.

[jcgrillo]

There's a simpler explanation that fits the data better: they're lying.

Generally, in the past when tech companies have made outlandish claims that were not backed by evidence, they're later found out to have lied. This is an ancient pattern going back to the dotcom era and before, but for recent examples you need only look back a few years to the web3 era. If they're not lying, they can show it by producing the results they claim. Until then, they're probably just lying.

[estearum]

What data does "they're lying" fit better than "they're earnest?"

> If they're not lying, they can show it by producing the results they claim. Until then, they're probably just lying

Brilliant framework: Anyone making claims about the future is not just speculating, not just wrong, but they are lying.

[jcgrillo]

> What data does "they're lying" fit better than "they're earnest?"

Claim: GPT-4 is a PhD level expert.

Claim: LLMs "reason"

Claim: LLMs "understand"

Claim: AI will automate jobs away

None of these are "earnest" claims for a company to make (whatever that means). They're vacuous bullshit, and false. It's a bunch of wordsmithing papering over results that are either hidden from view or just unimpressive. Even if the person saying that shit believes it, that's not super relevant--if a company is advertising these capabilities then... just... doesn't do it, that's lying. Corporate statements aren't unilaterally determined by fallible individuals, they're reviewed, crafted products. They can be fairly critiqued as such.

> Brilliant framework: Anyone making claims about the future is not just speculating, not just wrong, but they are lying.

Not just anyone, companies in particular. If a company tells you it's building something to replace jobs, and then it doesn't do it, that company lied.

[estearum]

Lol, I can name 3 specific jobs within my own company (of <10 people) that AI prevents me from having to hire for. They've been automated away.

My company itself (possible only with AI) does the work of at least several dozen people across my hundred customers or so. Those jobs are now automated away.

Does that mean you're lying, or just overly confident (and wrong) in your speculations?

FWIW, I wouldn't put Sam Altman in the category of "earnest." I'm not sure if you just aren't aware that Anthropic and OpenAI are different companies, or if you're arguing dishonestly by trying to put sama quotes in here? But weird move in either case!