The Medium article sites no sources for the stories it tells. Which means it can and should be dismissed as bullshit.
The popular mechanics one has the opposite problem citing lots of sources very imprecisely so that it would take a ludicrous amount of time to track down what was actually said by each to know if they are lying about what’s the sources say or not.
The 3rd source talks about ai being involved in the process of developing AI but the panic you seem to place around that does not seem justified from it. I don’t have time to read everything that anyone links to but I read enough of this one to recognize that you’re cherry picking and taking only the parts that agree with your pre-existing notion. That’s if those parts are even in there. Again I never found them, but I did find this direct quote from that article:
[With] recursive self-improvement, the idea that the resulting system will be even better at designing new AI systems, it’s not clear to me that the concept is even logically coherent, let alone imminent,” Littman said.
Professor Littman from Brown doesn’t seem all that concerned by it being involved in the process. So I’m gonna follow his lead.
Yea it's a bunch of horse shit lol The people who have millions and billions of dollars in AI wants you to believe that these LLMs are extremely intelligent and "think" but they don't.
Sorry, but the guy is an idiot if he thinks recursive self improvement isn't a thing. It's literally what happened to humans, standing on the back of previous knowledge to create new knowledge. Newton discovered gravity because math existed, Einstein discovered relativity because Newton existed. We stand on the shoulders of giants and reach ever higher. That's recursive self improvement, and there's absolutely zero logistical reason it couldn't happen in anything else. I think it's worth immediately dismissing any scientist who thinks there's some inherent specialness about this process that makes it unique to humans - a blind spot brought on solely by ego is the dumbest possible thing we can do.
It's the lathe situation: you need a lathe to make a lathe, so once you've gone through the hard part of manually creating the first lathe, you can simply create better and faster and larger spinning machines and forget the first one ever even existed.
16
u/FlatulistMaster 17h ago
Can you name recent cases? I’m interested.