Submitted by Impressive-Injury-91 t3_1118hkt in singularity
sprucenoose t1_j8dzbqs wrote
Reply to comment by space_troubadour in Anthropic's Jack Clark on AI progress by Impressive-Injury-91
He just paraphrased the long-established definition of the singularity, but made it confusing and wrong.
jamesj t1_j8f8w5x wrote
What did he get wrong? He's saying the rate of exponential change is increasing, which I think is true. Like, the doubling rate is getting shorter with time.
sprucenoose t1_j8jfprm wrote
>What did he get wrong? He's saying the rate of exponential change is increasing, which I think is true. Like, the doubling rate is getting shorter with time.
Even doubling, meaning a relatively small exponent of 2, quickly results in a graph with an effectively vertical rate of change and increasingly astronomical numbers. A higher exponent, like 10 or 1,000,000 or whatever, results in the same vertical line even more quickly, and an even higher exponent becomes vertical even more quickly, ad infinitum.
That is what exponential equations do - increasingly graph to vertical, ever more sharply with ever higher exponents. Even an exponent to the power of an exponent multiplies the powers together to provide a higher exponent. A "compounding" exponential equation can only do the same thing - increasingly graph vertical. It's not helpful.
zascar t1_j8f427d wrote
What's the better definition?
TheDividendReport t1_j8f7t8w wrote
"Robit get smart faster until boom boom"
Biuku t1_j8g2auk wrote
He described the curve from inside it. Like the Milky Way.
fool_on_a_hill t1_j8havtu wrote
I can't stand how he's trying to claim this as an original thought that his sweet lil brain came up with all on it's own! Thanks Jack, yeah buddy we're gonna put it right here on the fridge!
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments