Apparently there are rumours going around that Dario had a hand in Jensen’s ousting. I’d suppose its because he’s one of those ‘we can’t loose to China’ folks. But also wouldn’t that be a seriously stupid move with the IPO around the corner? Then again, Anthropic are not exactly the smartest bunch (and these are just rumours)
putting ‘we dont know if we’ll ever be profitable’ in the IPO filing was definitely a brave move, I’ll give them that
I mean if it keeps going down its going to be pretty bad news for Anthropic’s IPO
It absolutely is (a human right to have sex) for two consenting adults who aren’t blood related. It certainly isn’t something for Ronald fucking McDonald to have an opinion about.
If only he had a non-related consenting adult called “his wife”
The board should punish Huang without punishing the industry and the nation. For example by cutting his salary and stock to 0 for 2 years.
Wouldn’t that also tank the industry??
The second affair has hit Nvidia stock
But given how much the domestic AI push has used hawkishness about China to justify itself there could be real problems keeping congress at bay if it turns into both an anti-AI CEO issue and an anti-China issue.
that was my general line of thought. a lot of the AI push have been moved along by ‘we can’t loose to China’ so Huang giving so much stuff to China is definitely going to make this a lot messier of a debacle
I vaguely remember it being mentioned that one of the METR staff was married to a rationalist (it was either an Anthropic employee or Paul Christiano, I forgot who)
yeah essentially
the scaling laws are basically that AGI/ASI can be created by just scaling up the current LLMs
Pretty sure its just a fancier term for AGI (Top Expert Dominating AI)
Imo the trillion dollar question of if Huang is keeping his job is anyone’s guess right now, with all the nonsense in this administration its hard to tell what will happen. But my best guess is that while Trump can feign ignorance and try to pull strings to protect Huang, with a Democratic Congress and Senate-who are largely anti-AI-coming in January, that old trick won’t last forever. If a divorce goes through then that’ll definitely be a nail in the coffin
So I went all the way down to the appendix, and found a gem:
Appendix: Ambiguity in “80% of current acceleration is due to AI”. Claude Opus 5.5 gives the following possible interpretations of METR’s claim that “we guess that a majority (perhaps ≈80%) of the current (October 2026) acceleration is due to AI.”
Claude Opus 5.5 gives the follow possible interpretations
Did…did they just say they used Claude for this?? (Ironic, because METR also used a bunch of Claude in the source article)
Also, this is the median value. No mean value and doesn’t seem much modal value. Only one paragraph where they mention that the acceleration was only on well-specified tasks (in the section titled “How large is the (AI-attributable) acceleration in the current pace of progress, really?”)
reposting this r/BetterOffline post for further context on the METR data
The AI 2027 authors are back: Q3.5 Timelines Update: Looks Like the Intelligence Explosion Will Happen in 2027 After All
It’s all about that new METR data. Took a quick scroll and the whole thing is about forecasting and modelling. Its pretty lengthy so if anyones willing to take the plunge and read it all youll have my thanks
METR recently estimated that Anthropic is now making AI progress about twice as fast as its historical rate (they would not be surprised by anything from 1.3x to 3x), and guessed that “perhaps ≈80%” of the current acceleration is due to AI. If they’re right, that implies an AI-driven acceleration that is 5 months ahead of the AI 2027 scenario.
Going down a little bit:
A 1.7x pace of progress is 5 months ahead of the AI 2027 scenario. AI 2027 predicted 2x AI R&D uplift in Dec 2026; as argued above, this would imply a substantially lower pace of progress than the 1.7x AI-attributable pace of progress that METR’s estimates imply for Nov. So when exactly did AI 2027 predict a 1.7x pace of progress over baseline? We created this trajectory by modifying a few key parameters until it roughly matched AI 2027. In that trajectory, 1.7x acceleration over the 2024.0–2025.5 rate of progress happens in roughly April 2027. So by this metric, we are ~5 months ahead of schedule.
And a chart of their predictions to end it all off:
(Only one person above 50%?)
Mark your calendars everybody!
most of the other replies are all ‘well yeah we knew sustaining AI progress would need exponentially more resources but its like definitely worth it’
It’s just ‘well the financials don’t make any sense and these companies are not looking profitable anytime soon but like AI models are super duper good and AGI is right around the corner so you need to invest’
top quality sneer from “@1techuptopiapls” on X the fascism app:
”man proves AI improvements are not economically viable as new Anthropic model successfully cures cancer"
is the cure to cancer in the room with us right now
My best guess is that it would be something about ‘stopping China from making AGI’