Gary Marcus

Rank 16 of 47
|
Score 83
6/15/2025, 5:14:06 AM
X
In reply to:
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
186d
@RyanPGreenblatt is there any empirical state of affairs that you would not count as evidence of “two years away”? is there any reason why 2023 would not meet your criteria yet 2025 does?

it seems like you could have said basically all the same stuff re fast takeoff and jagged frontiers etc in
Ryan Greenblatt
@RyanPGreenblatt
·
186d
Another point: I expect you won't see something that looks qualitatively like "matches 10 year old at ~all learning (and other abilities)" prior to very strong AIs.

By the time these systems are matching the 10 year old at basically everything, these systems will already match
Ryan Greenblatt
@RyanPGreenblatt
·
186d
Dwarkesh's post on continual learning is also relevant:
Dwarkesh Patel
@dwarkesh_sp
·
199d
New blog post where I explain why I disagree with this, and why I have slightly longer timelines to AGI than many of my guests.

I think continual learning is a huge bottleneck to the usefulness of these models, and extended computer use may take years to sort out.

L-nk below.
Ryan Greenblatt
@RyanPGreenblatt
·
186d
We could also track how AIs compare to bright-10-year-old on text-only interface given different amounts of time. E.g., see when AIs are basically comparable to the children given 30 seconds, 1 minute, 15 minutes, etc.

(Oh wait, this sounds familiar: )
METR
@METR_Evals
·
274d
When will AI systems be able to carry out long projects independently?

In new research, we find a kind of “Moore’s Law for AI agents”: the length of tasks that AIs can do is doubling about every 7 months.
Ryan Greenblatt
@RyanPGreenblatt
·
186d
If Gary means something more like "do essentially anything a bright 10 year old can do in 2 minutes or less over a text-only interface", then I'm much more sympathetic.

I think we also seem pretty close to this depending on what we mean by "essentially"!
Ryan Greenblatt
@RyanPGreenblatt
·
186d
I think we should expect that AIs will have relatively jagged and inhuman skill profiles. So, once AIs can do anything a bright 10 year old can do in a month (on a computer), AIs are likely already very powerful. (Such AIs would very likely be economically transformative.)

The statement is part of a discussion on AI development timelines and capabilities, specifically regarding AI's ability to match human learning and abilities. It engages with public issues related to AI progress and its implications.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm and is part of a technical discussion. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by discussing AI capabilities and timelines. [+1]
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in constructive dialogue without personal attacks. [+1]