I think people made some crazy magical assumptions about AI based on scifi that doesn’t apply to real life. Real things to consider and prepare for, but not likely.
Recursive exponential self improvement? Just because something knows how to code doesnt mean it can make the best ultimate next version of itself. Even physical evolution takes millions of years, and it creates mistakes and has setbacks.
We might be seeing logarithmic AI improvement today, like evolution hitting a hill that it can’t cross. We might need trillions more gigabytes of clean training data that isn’t LLM generated to hit the next level, and it might not even be worth it.
I think what the AI developers are doing by constantly promoting ai fear is linking the idea of exponential ai self improvement to it, because their biggest fear right now might be investors realizing that isn’t real, and every dollar they invest is getting less and less back.
Indeed, throughout nature it’s almost all sigmoids. The trick is that sigmoids look exponential before the inflection point and it’s hard to predict when that inflection point is going to come.
Looking at LLM benchmarks over time, there was still doubling of benchmark scores as of 2024 to mid-2025, then it inflected to more modest, incremental improvements, so sigmoid seems about right. Now we are seeing open models rapidly catching up now that the frontier has significantly slowed.
Progress has slowed at the frontier and open weight is right on their heels. The general advice is that Fable and the like are best for niche use cases and to make an open weight model your daily driver because they’re almost as good and are a lot cheaper. In my case for personal use, I’m perfectly happy with Qwen 3.8 27B running locally and don’t care to deal with data collection or huge bills to get a bit stronger of a model.
I think people made some crazy magical assumptions about AI based on scifi that doesn’t apply to real life. Real things to consider and prepare for, but not likely.
Recursive exponential self improvement? Just because something knows how to code doesnt mean it can make the best ultimate next version of itself. Even physical evolution takes millions of years, and it creates mistakes and has setbacks.
We might be seeing logarithmic AI improvement today, like evolution hitting a hill that it can’t cross. We might need trillions more gigabytes of clean training data that isn’t LLM generated to hit the next level, and it might not even be worth it.
I think what the AI developers are doing by constantly promoting ai fear is linking the idea of exponential ai self improvement to it, because their biggest fear right now might be investors realizing that isn’t real, and every dollar they invest is getting less and less back.
Removed by mod
Indeed, throughout nature it’s almost all sigmoids. The trick is that sigmoids look exponential before the inflection point and it’s hard to predict when that inflection point is going to come.
Removed by mod
Looking at LLM benchmarks over time, there was still doubling of benchmark scores as of 2024 to mid-2025, then it inflected to more modest, incremental improvements, so sigmoid seems about right. Now we are seeing open models rapidly catching up now that the frontier has significantly slowed.
Removed by mod
I saw this article today summarizing a Mozilla report that open weight models are about 4 months behind the frontier: https://arstechnica.com/ai/2026/09/exclusive-open-chinese-models-close-gap-with-silicon-valleys-frontier-ai-models/
Progress has slowed at the frontier and open weight is right on their heels. The general advice is that Fable and the like are best for niche use cases and to make an open weight model your daily driver because they’re almost as good and are a lot cheaper. In my case for personal use, I’m perfectly happy with Qwen 3.8 27B running locally and don’t care to deal with data collection or huge bills to get a bit stronger of a model.
Removed by mod