Liberals will fight for the rights of the military, while the military is being used on domestic soil to actively oppress our rights. Predictable as ever.

Haha. Sure. Humans never make up bullshit to confidently sell a fake answer.

Fucking ridiculous.

No one’s claiming these are AGI. Again, you keep having to deflect to irrelevant arguments.

Again, you only say it’s a moving target to dispel anything favorable towards AI. Then you do a complete 180 when it’s negative reporting on AI. Makes your argument meaningless, if you can’t even stick to your own point.

Except you yourself just stated that it was impossible to measure performance of these things. When it’s favorable to AI, you claim it can’t be measured. When it’s unfavorable for AI, you claim of course it’s measurable. Your argument is so flimsy and your understanding so limited that you can’t even stick to a single idea. You’re all over the place.

Agreed. 70% is astoundingly high for today’s models. Something stinks.

So you’re saying the article’s measurements about AI agents being wrong 70% of the time is made up? Or is AI performance only measurable when the results help anti-AI narratives?

I’m not sure the anti-AI marketing stance is any more solid of a position. Though it’s probably easier to defend, since it’s so vague and not based on anything measurable.

This is the same kind of short-sighted dismissal I see a lot in the religion vs science argument. When they hinge their pro-religion stance on the things science can’t explain, they’re defending an ever diminishing territory as science grows to explain more things. It’s a stupid strategy with an expiration date on your position.

All of the anti-AI positions, that hinge on the low quality or reliability of the output, are defending an increasingly diminished stance as the AI’s are further refined. And I simply don’t believe that the majority of the people making this argument actually care about the quality of the output. Even when it gets to the point of producing better output than humans across the board, these folks are still going to oppose it regardless. Why not just openly oppose it in general, instead of pinning your position to an argument that grows increasingly irrelevant by the day?

DeepSeek exposed the same issue with the anti-AI people dedicated to the environmental argument. We were shown proof that there’s significant progress in the development of efficient models, and it still didn’t change any of their minds. Because most of them don’t actually care about the environmental impacts. It’s just an anti-AI talking point that resonated with them.

The more baseless these anti-AI stances get, the more it seems to me that it’s a lot of people afraid of change and afraid of the fundamental economic shifts this will require, but they’re embarrassed or unable to articulate that stance. And it doesn’t help that the luddites haven’t been able to predict a single development. Just constantly flailing to craft a new argument to criticize the current models and tech. People are learning not to take these folks seriously.

Why should they be focused on it? Xbox is now just a slimmed down Windows pc. You can play the exact same games on a pc, with access to the same storefront.

What’s the problem exactly?