Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Benefit of doubt is a great concept. The other extreme is: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Why should we restrict ourselves to a binary choice? Can we not think in a more nuanced fashion, in Bayesian terms? In other words look at all available evidence and assign probabilities?

"We are the next DeepMind" is easy to say ... The DeepMind founders had a stellar predigee in computer games, AI and neuroscience, the Verses founders have a cryptocurrency background. Verses also released [1] last month. What both the Atari and the Mastermind announcements have in common is the lack of details, including code. Why do they not show their code? How do we know their figures are real? We've just had the OpenAI vs FrontierMath discussion [2, 3]. Presumably, being able to play Pong, a 1972 computer game, is unlikely to be their moat ...

Interesting also their 2024 MLST presentation [4]. Does that inspire confidence? It was that video that made my priors on Friston having had a breakthrough in ML change downwards dramatically ... But do not take my word for it, please make up your own mind.

[1] https://www.verses.ai/blog/genius-outperforms-openai-model-i...

[2] https://techcrunch.com/2025/01/19/ai-benchmarking-organizati...

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42763231

[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bL00-jtRrMA



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: