[-] lurker@awful.systems 2 points 1 hour ago

Anthropic’s IPO roadshow could potentially start this week the ‘before thanksgiving’ due date is still in place

[-] lurker@awful.systems 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Yes.

ECI is the benchmark measurement from Epoch AI, and AECI is benchmark measurement from Anthropic

[-] lurker@awful.systems 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

I looked again, and it seems they just flat out deleted every other ECI measurement except for Astra

Here’s what it looked like then

and heres what it looks like now

Which is suspect because all of those ECI measurements were behind pace

I looked through their methodology page (https://github.com/spicylemonade/AI-2027-tracker/blob/master/docs/methodology.md) and the only reason I can find is that AECI fits METR better, and that “The three ECI variants are too close to separate on 12 tests, so the chart keeps the simplest one.” Yet they say that ECI and AECI cannot be compared, so why keep Astra and get rid of all the other? They kept in multiple different models for Opus and Mythos, so why remove GPT 5.4 Pro, Sol and Opus’s ECI? Also shows that the website had AI slop assistance via Claude

[-] lurker@awful.systems 5 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

AI 2027 tracker has updated again

-On the main page chart, they decided to map the Anthropic unreleased models from the METR report for some reason. Setting aside how mapping unreleased models is inherently flawed because we don’t have the full picture, the METR report also said that their measurements come with a high uncertainty

Onto the list of predictions

-Late 2026 is at 84%

-Still doing that weird thing where 80% is both partially accurate and confirmed accurate

-The stock market prediction should be lower, since it didn’t get anywhere near 30%

-Imo the AI narrative prediction should also be lower, since theres conflicting reports about AI being amazing/AI being trash all over mainstream news

-One prediction got a 100% score even though part of it didn’t happen (under OpenBrain releases Agent 1 mini: "The part that did not happen is OpenBrain blowing away the competition: several labs shipped cheap, near-frontier models within weeks of each other.")

-The key metrics seem to be mostly based on estimates rather than confirmed figures, so likely subject to change

Overall seems like they got a lot of ‘easy’ stuff right (ie business gurus shilling AI) but missed the harder stuff

[-] lurker@awful.systems 17 points 1 day ago

Anthropic employee has had their brain destroyed by rationalist circlejerk

‘we need to make armageddon happen as fast as possible even though I dont think it will be very good. a trillion dollars please’

[-] lurker@awful.systems 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)
[-] lurker@awful.systems 40 points 1 day ago

“our IPO will be supported by the people we are forcing to buy it’ is definitely a vote of confidence and not at all ominous

[-] lurker@awful.systems 32 points 1 day ago

Sharing a gem from r/BetterOffline

"The next Google is dancing naked in front of you. If you can’t see the value of it, you don’t deserve to make money." For the first and hopefully last time: Dario Amodei, please put your willy away

58
[-] lurker@awful.systems 47 points 1 day ago

At the Financial Times Future of AI Summit, the AI vendors were shocked that nobody likes them. They don’t really understand the objections — one CEO compared data center protestors to protests against masks for COVID.

Utterly ridiculous people who are now getting the wake up to reality they deserve

[-] lurker@awful.systems 9 points 1 day ago

Anthropic is going ahead with their IPO

This is looking like its going to be a bloody disaster but if the world wants to feed my schadenfreude by all means keep it coming

[-] lurker@awful.systems 6 points 1 day ago

Struck some gold on slobstack

19
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by lurker@awful.systems to c/sneerclub@awful.systems

Sneerers likely already know this, but compiling all this for future reference.

(Shoutout to Emile Torres for providing most of this)

From his Bankless podcast interview:

”have basic moral questions about whether it’s ethical for humans to have human children, if having transhuman children is an option instead. Like, these humans running around? Are they, like, the current humans who wanted eternal youth but, like, not the brain upgrades? Because I do see the case for letting an existing person choose, “No, I just want eternal youth and no brain upgrades, thank you.” But then if you’re deliberately having the equivalent of a very crippled child when you could just as easily have a not crippled child…..Like, should humans in their present form be around together? Are we, like, kind of too sad in some ways? … I’d say that the happy future looks like beings of light having lots of fun in a nicely connected computing fabric powered by the Sun, if we haven’t taken the sun apart yet. Maybe there’s enough real sentiment in people that you just, like, clear all the humans off the Earth and leave the entire place as a park. … Yeah, like … That was always the [thing] to be fought for. That was always the point, from the perspective of everyone who’s been in this for a long time.”

Clip from his interview with Stephen Wolfram where he says he’s not concerned with being replaced, only that he’s concerned that the thing replacing him won’t be ‘better’.

(full interview here)

Eliezer tweet about the ‘worthy successor’ and another one

And saving the best for last, from his podcast interview with Daniel Faggella:

“If sacrificing all of humanity were the only way, and a reliable way, to get … godlike things out there — superintelligences who still care about each other, who are still aware of the world and having fun — I would ultimately make that trade-off.”

(full interview here)

Feel free to add anything I’ve missed

63

Turning this sneer into its own post because you need to hate AI companies (and the US) more

The US power sector would emit 2.1 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide by 2030, after factoring in planned AI projects. That’s 618 million tons more than 2025 levels, by the Sierra Club’s calculations, or about a 42% increase.

But how much is a difficult question to answer. There’s so much uncertainty in the projections for power emissions that the lowest and highest estimates differ by more electricity than the combined demand of California and Florida. The Sierra Club’s estimate of the climate impacts of the data center buildout is higher than others released so far. The wide range of projections is due to questions around how many facilities will actually be built, what technologies they will ultimately use and how much renewable energy capacity comes online over the next few years.

7
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by lurker@awful.systems to c/sneerclub@awful.systems

Originally posted about in the stubsack but decided to make this its own post because what the hell, let’s see how everyone’s favourite scenario is doing!

There are two takes on it: the author’s own (their 2025 evaluation is here) and another one from this website called AI 2027 tracker (not run by the authors) pretty sure this one only evaluates the qualitative predictions and not the quantitive ones

Both of them show that we are behind AI 2027’s predicted pace. By the author estimate: 2025 was only at 58% and 2026 is 69% of progress. AI 2027 tracker shows a consistent decrease in accuracy over time (from 100% to 81% to 91% to 46%)

7
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by lurker@awful.systems to c/sneerclub@awful.systems

From the Old SneerClub

From the recent influencer camp, our friends have made a parody music video on AGI apocalypse. I wish I was joking

40
87
submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by lurker@awful.systems to c/techtakes@awful.systems
64

Originally posted in the Stubsack, but decided to make it its own post because why not

12
submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by lurker@awful.systems to c/sneerclub@awful.systems

this was already posted on reddit sneerclub, but I decided to crosspost it here so you guys wouldn’t miss out on Yudkowsky calling himself a genre savy character, and him taking what appears to be a shot at the Zizzians

27
submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by lurker@awful.systems to c/sneerclub@awful.systems

originally posted in the thread for sneers not worth a whole post, then I changed my mind and decided it is worth a whole post, cause it is pretty damn important

Posted on r/HPMOR roughly one day ago

full transcript:

Epstein asked to call during a fundraiser. My notes say that I tried to explain AI alignment principles and difficulty to him (presumably in the same way I always would) and that he did not seem to be getting it very much. Others at MIRI say (I do not remember myself / have not myself checked the records) that Epstein then offered MIRI $300K; which made it worth MIRI's while to figure out whether Epstein was an actual bad guy versus random witchhunted guy, and ask if there was a reasonable path to accepting his donations causing harm; and the upshot was that MIRI decided not to take donations from him. I think/recall that it did not seem worthwhile to do a whole diligence thing about this Epstein guy before we knew whether he was offering significant funding in the first place, and then he did, and then MIRI people looked further, and then (I am told) MIRI turned him down.

Epstein threw money at quite a lot of scientists and I expect a majority of them did not have a clue. It's not standard practice among nonprofits to run diligence on donors, and in fact I don't think it should be. Diligence is costly in executive attention, it is relatively rare that a major donor is using your acceptance of donations to get social cover for an island-based extortion operation, and this kind of scrutiny is more efficiently centralized by having professional law enforcement do it than by distributing it across thousands of nonprofits.

In 2009, MIRI (then SIAI) was a fiscal sponsor for an open-source project (that is, we extended our nonprofit status to the project, so they could accept donations on a tax-exempt basis, having determined ourselves that their purpose was a charitable one related to our mission) and they got $50K from Epstein. Nobody at SIAI noticed the name, and since it wasn't a donation aimed at SIAI itself, we did not run major-donor relations about it.

This reply has not been approved by MIRI / carefully fact-checked, it is just off the top of my own head.

34

I searched for “eugenics” on yud’s xcancel (i will never use twitter, fuck you elongated muskrat) because I was bored, got flashbanged by this gem. yud, genuinely what are you talking about

view more: next ›

lurker

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 9 months ago