Ramez Naam gives a skeptic’s take on Recursive Self-Improvement.

58 points•anon373839•1 day ago•29 comments•

29 comments

toasty2281 day ago
Pet theory: 70% of what we're busy with brings no value outside of keeping people busy/employed, which means automating it and making it 100x faster also brings no value in the end, no matter how much "intelligence" you can deploy
heathrow838291 day ago
This!

An economist might counter that any such business would loose market share. But, in actuality, a lot busineses are not competing for survival or even for market share but have it due to entrenchment. examples include: ISPs, healthcare, etc

saturn86011 day ago
On the one hand this leads to the mediocre world we live in but on the other hand, thank goodness that these businesses exist. Imagine if every company were run like Tesla/SpaceX. You thought the horrendous birth rate in China was bad...it would be nothing compared to this theoretical world everybody is always in dog eat dog jungle survival mode.

I was reminded about how delusional people are when I was hanging out with some MAGA supporters in the south this weekend. These people adore Elon Musk and what he's done and the way that he runs his companies. They get this mentality because they work in government where their jobs are very cushy, but there is a lot of incompetence and bureaucracy going on, and they hate it. I honestly believe they wouldn't enjoy living in a world where Elon Musk mentality is running everything, including their jobs. That delusion makes them think that a world where Elon Musk is running everyone else's job is better for them.

I'd argue that of the people that Elon hires, many of them probably grew up in an environment where they had the support, love, and care that they need to become great because their predecessors worked in occupation that are not competing for survival. Else you end up with situations like China where the youths just don't have the ability (due to time, money and energy) to put down roots and build up the next generation. Their predecessors planted the seeds and nurtured them to grow value that is then extracted by Elon working the people into the ground and tossing them aside when they are no longer useful.

light_triad1 day ago
Some sectors are less productive, but the reality is more mundane: only about 30% of the global workforce are knowledge workers. Adopting AI in real workflows takes time, and that time saved might not be used productively. Also solving Millennium problems is an amazing feat of engineering and mathematics, but doesn't change people's lives that much.
fulafel1 day ago
Many are actively harmful (fex. bringing about the climate catastrophe).
kelseyfrog1 day ago
Like advertising[1].

1. "Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is I don't know which half." - John Wanamaker

runarberg1 day ago
There is a name for this phenomena. It is called bullshit jobs[1]. The author David Graeber who coined the term argued that over half of jobs were bullshit jobs, so your 70% estimate is not far from what some actual scholars in the field also estimate.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_Jobs

jmathai1 day ago
I don't want to discount the amazing progress we've made with technology to improve people's lives.

There's the meme that the smartest people in the world are figuring out how to show ads. It's no different this time around. I understand that not everyone working on AI is building an ad network - but ultimately it feels like that's the end result.

It didn't feel quite this way 15 years ago. Back then, it felt much more tangible how technology was improving our lives. It is sort of tangible now too - I am doing things with AI that I otherwise couldn't. But somehow if feels like progress for the sake of progress.

And to be honest, it doesn't feel like the progress is for me or the people I care about.

dsign1 day ago
> ... it doesn't feel like the progress is for me or the people I care about.

AI is doing very little to improve the human condition; all it seems to be good at is optimizing productivity and generating profits somewhere maybe. That is not an AI-generated problem; using profits as an all-things compass is a disease we have been cooking for ourselves for a long time. But I'm sort of hoping AI will make the problem so bad that we will be forced to fix it, or perish.

That’s one of the main points in Karp’s book. All the smart people are happy to spend all day pushing gooning content on children or triggering alcoholics to relapse, but ask them to tackle crime or defend the country and they’ll tell you it’s immoral.

Nobody tries to solve any actual problems anymore, they just produce meaningless consumer slop. And when people like Musk try to invent reusable rockets or electric cars, everyone says they’re stupid. And then they do it, and everyone says it was always going to happen anyway.

When is the last time Google or meta or whoever actually solved a problem? They’ll spend 500b in a year, enough to reforest the entire planet, and what do they actually give us? I couldn’t name a single thing they’ve done in the last ten years which actually produces value, but they’ve spent trillions.

aeternum1 day ago
https://washingtoncrossingadvisors.com/wp-content/uploads/20...

It has exploded, the explosion just isn't evenly distributed. And just as it was with the internet, most people and even most industries are not actually using it yet. Many that are are using it in name only.

People can star github repos and signup their employees for a new subscription quickly, real adoption takes far longer.

chzblck1 day ago
I am a smooth brained operator. very much the definition of vibecoding.

Last night I was able to give claude a task and they increased the classification accuracy from

81.3/89.9/92.1 to 90.9/99.3/99.6

In a little over 2 hours. In a task that up until opus 5.5 I was doing by hand/manually. and the day before was able to get the first results.

The intelligence explosion may just be user error.

I think we're on the cusp of an intelligence explosion, but most jobs have no real purpose besides giving us sometime to do and a paycheck. Automating those jobs and making them 10x faster won't really help anyone. Read Bullshit Jobs by Graeber.

FWIW, why I'm rooting hard for AGI: -In the best case, AGI will lead to UBI, so unemployment for all becomes the default scenario. Sounds scary but unemployment is better than many soul-sucking occupations, e.g. cold-calling. -If AGI does result in a productivity boom due to automation, we're in for a deflationary spiral, so we don't need a huge amount of money for a decent standard of living.

It does lead to the question of how we'll find meaning in our lives, but I think we'll adapt in a few years.

If you’re a doctor and you have to work five days a week, why would you keep working if 99% of the population just sits at home wanking all day?

If you’re the robot owner, why wouldn’t you just cull the population and build Jurassic park?

There’s just no way it’s feasible to pay the entire population to sit around.

Read the full thread on Hacker News →