Simply one of the two, explain if you feel the need. Do you think AI will be the end of us for various reasons even if it's just an economic bubble pop or do you think AI will be what it says on the tin and saves us all from ourselves?

AI will help people exploit Consoles software/hardware peculiarities! PC won!! There's a bright future for gaming!

I will finally be able to play everything on my precious PC S2S2!!!

AI won't save us from ourselves, only make it easier to destroy ourselves. But I'm still AI optimistic as a powerful search engine that can find patterns and form a consensus. I'm hesitant or rather against the current race to gen AI, it's kinda pointless and mostly a hoax that only distracts from the real issues. Use AI to optimize green energy rather than guzzling up energy to create a new 'god'.

My views on this should be well known by this point but yeah I'm optimistic about it. Technological advancement has always improved living standards long term and it's easy to envision AI and robotics doing the same through creating a post-scarcity society and in general causing scientific progress to skyrocket. Governments are gonna need to start taking it extremely seriously soon though since it shouldn't be much longer at this point till capabilities start getting outright insane. Lots of resources need to be put into making sure alignment goes right basically.

AI will be the end of everything.. you, me, all of us. We aren’t making it out of this decade. So hold onto anything when the end comes. 

Somewhere between ambivalence and agnosticism. I'm not sure if it's a bubble or a true revolution that's here to stay. People like to clown on its shortcomings but the speed of its progress is truly staggering at times. Whatever you think about the ethics of it all won't change anything about its capabilities and in the end that's all that capitalism really cares about. I don't know if it will end up putting everyone out of a job; the potential is there but then that's what they said about every other form of automation and yet humanity continued to flourish.

I'm just going to do my best to adapt to whatever comes. If the bubble does pop then cool; maybe we'll return to a little bit of normalcy. If not then sticking your nose in the air or burying your head in the sand isn't going to do you any favors. Lately I've adopted a hybrid approach to my independent learning. I'm still learning software the 'old fashioned way' but I'm also keeping up to date on the latest progress of AI models and how they might change modern workflows, even experimenting a bit with ComfyUI myself.

Like the Industrial Revolution or the Atomic Age this is probably going to be a very messy transition that leaves a lot of people in the lurch, but if we don't kill ourselves then hopefully we'll come out the other side better over all, however long that takes.

LLMs probably won't destroy us, but it's hard to be 100% sure. It looks like they're capable of transforming at least some fields, but the real question is whether they can do that in an economically sustainable manner. Economic viability will determine the eventual outcome. I don't think LLMs can change everything though, they're too error-prone, and the technology just isn't on solid ground - we're already pushing it way past what it's designed to do. It's incredible how far we can make it go, but it's still fundamentally flawed for general use.

As for AGI, that will be a much more interesting story. It doesn't look like it's going to happen any time soon, or at least that's what I was saying for the longest time. LLMs might be able to accelerate the development of AGI though, but we'll see how it goes.

Of course all this also hinges on the availability of computing power. It's not clear how much we'll end up needing, or how much AGI will end up needing.

I, for one, welcome our new AI overlords.

I'd argue this year showed that 10x scaling from 2025 (after two years of similar-sized models being RL-fried to a crisp since the hardware for making them larger was unavailable) was enough to elicit high levels of common sense, which is key to applying technical skills and setting priorities in a way that lets agents do valuable work. The same scaling also allowed LLMs to go from doing well at IMO to solving Millennium Prize problems.

Since there's at least another 100x of scaling until 2032, it's almost certain to me now that all engineering that humans can do is going to be automated just with the current methods, including the creation of post-training/RL tasks and environments to plug AI capability gaps as they get discovered.

The question is whether continuous learning is included in that or it remains inaccessible to LLMs and needs a much more impressive conceptual breakthrough.

I disagree with the belief that new technologies are inherently beneficial to humanity. They often are beneficial, but there are plenty of examples of technologies having significant downsides, if not outright lowering quality of life.

I do not believe that generative AI is going to destroy humanity or anything like that, but I believe that in the short-to-medium term, it will definitely cause hardships. It can potentially lead to further economic growth, but that is NOT guaranteed.