Linus doesn't believe in singularity

Is he stupid? He seems to fundamentally misunderstand the implication of self-improving AI
https://www.realworldtech.com/forum/?threadid=217627&curpostid=217717

bros... I might have to install Windows...

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

Black Rifle Cuck Company, Conservative Humor Shirt $21.68

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >impetus
    Lost me there Linus. I respect Linus a lot but this is out of depth.

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >mansplain
    that's gonna be a YIKES from me

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      He's trying to be cool with the kids and it's sad to see.
      I don't know how some people can be so smart and stupid at the same time.
      Assuming this is real, I didn't know he posted in web forums.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Linus was never very good at common sense.
        Many years ago when he was asked why Linux wasn't gaining market share on the desktop, his answer was because OEMs weren't including it in their computers like Windows.
        Not because of the brittle, server-oriented software management, lack of drivers, or poor proprietary software support at that time.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >his answer was because OEMs weren't including it in their computers like Windows
          I wouldn't say it's that's the only cause, but not getting people to use it is one way to ensure that people aren't using it.
          Out of all the Steam Deck owners, very few of them are going out of the way to uninstall what's preinstalled to install Windows.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            True, but Steam Deck, Android, etc solved the main problems faced by desktop Linux.
            If installing a game broke the Steam deck UI or audio and forced the user to wipe or play the library linking game, it would've turned into more of a hobby device.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Chromebooks and Android massively increased Linux marketshare. The reason why Linus moronic is because it's shallow thinking, he needs to ask why one layer deeper. Why don't most OEM's include it?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Many years ago when he was asked why Linux wasn't gaining market share on the desktop, his answer was because OEMs weren't including it in their computers like Windows.
          But that's absolutely right.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      He's trying to be cool with the kids and it's sad to see.
      I don't know how some people can be so smart and stupid at the same time.
      Assuming this is real, I didn't know he posted in web forums.

      His daughter (a known feminist) has brainwashed him. Typical finno-swede.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        you're moronic if you believe this. his own father was a registered member of finland's communist party and linus has had a meltdown before over users using the word "communist" with a negative connotation. if his daughter became "a known feminist", it was because of linus, the same way that linus is a cryptocommunist because of his father

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I love how they degrade each passing generation.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          and yet a commie has more realistic and economic sense of AI. you motherfrickers are freaking out over a literal nothing burger. and if you are pretending to care about wealth inequality and "unfair" distribution, then guess what: you couldn't do shit pre-AI, you won't do shit post-AI.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >and yet a commie has more realistic and economic sense of AI.
            Slow down.
            Last time i had an argument with commies they were rambling about how computers managing the economy could have saved the ussr, as if computers can make creative effective choices while collecting correct data all the time. And let's not talking about the need for optimization that such AI may focus on, leading to moral risk.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >muh singularity

            >as if computers can make creative effective choices while collecting correct data all the time
            you didn't understand shit, moron. computers are used for comms and that could have been used to transfer and process data in real time. computers are never supposed to choose, the ones choosing are always humans.

            Humans are self-improving, have been exponentially growing for 6000 years, and we can't fricking solve cancer, flying cars or world hunger for SHIT.

            Why the frick do you morons think that self-improving = endless improvement? Have you ever seen a colony of organized ants living in a complex network of evolving tunnels make a flying vehicle? Have you ever seen a flock of birds create an economic system? Have you ever seen a group of trees create a worldwide pheromone communication system? All of those species have had literal millions of years to do so. They are also constantly evolving.
            Why the frick would self-improving silicon not have limitations of its own?

            >and we can't fricking solve cancer, flying cars or world hunger for SHIT.
            >t.moron

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >computers are used for comms and that could have been used to transfer and process data in real time
            So what? Soviet enterprises sucked 200% more resources and three times more electricity than western ones, a planner is simply not a technician.

            The problem of centrally planned economies is not just about transmissions not being fast, it's also about decision making not being fast, human skills and knowledge not being condensed in a single entity, data missing or lacking transparency. Add to it incentives, like people competing against each others for getting the attention of the system.

            Why do you think these economies have switched back? even china swiched back and has more control in a mixed economy.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I'm not saying I agree with the concept of a centrally planned economy (or the contrart), I'm just saying that that's what it was supposed to do, an "internet for socialist economies".

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >I'm just saying that that's what it was supposed to do, an "internet for socialist economies".
            i guess we misunderstood each other

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >his own father was a registered member of finland's communist party
          Holy based. Downloading Ubuntu right now.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Someone can be a communist without believing in radical feminism.
          Che Guevara killed homosexuals, Stalin just sent them to the gulags.
          It's rare but someone can believe some parts of leftist ideology and not others.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Didn't he live in Portland too? How could his daughter not become a feminist in Portland?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Didn't he live in Portland
            where does he live now?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Inside his wife's headlock

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Typical finno-swede.
        It's fennoswede, you fricking wordlet.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I thought I misread that for a second. How does one's mind gravitate to that? I'd want to die on the spot if I even THOUGHT to sincerely use that in a conversation, let alone writing it out and hitting send. Also the sperging over cryptocurrency (though I'm not saying most crypto doesn't suck). What paint do you have to huff to become like this?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      hes clearly using it an a mocking/ironic way you moron

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        [...]
        [...]
        I think he's using the word ironically

        no level of irony could compensate for the word's fundamentally dishonest and subversive nature. if you use it all you have been successfully trained

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Wait, are you seriously claiming that using the word "mansplaining" is dishonest and subversion?!

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      He's trying to be cool with the kids and it's sad to see.
      I don't know how some people can be so smart and stupid at the same time.
      Assuming this is real, I didn't know he posted in web forums.

      I thought I misread that for a second. How does one's mind gravitate to that? I'd want to die on the spot if I even THOUGHT to sincerely use that in a conversation, let alone writing it out and hitting send. Also the sperging over cryptocurrency (though I'm not saying most crypto doesn't suck). What paint do you have to huff to become like this?

      I think he's using the word ironically

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        hes clearly using it an a mocking/ironic way you moron

        Hi Linus

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        wait did you just try to mansplain?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          His pronouns are xir/xer, please respect that!

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Lina Torvalds (she/her)

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    neural nets and LLM aren't "self-improving". if they trained themselves on their own data they'd regress to a normal distribution of random phonetic tuples

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This is the best explanation of nonobtainable agi that I've read, and I'm someone who feels it will happen.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        then your in a fricking bubble, it aint hard for even normal poeple to think "how many times does reading the internet internet make you smarter"

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This. Plus:
      1. They are limited by hardware, and our the ability of GPUs to calculate tensors is not approaching infinity.
      2. Neural nets are not going to simply be able to "become twice as smart" within the same hardware forever, there is some sort of diminishing return.
      3. Neural nets aren't even real AI, it's just regression. Neural networks are simply a part of what will one day be true AI, same way there are non-conscious sections of your brain identifying objects for you and passing that this red circle is an "apple" to your actual consciousness.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >neural nets and LLM aren't "self-improving". if they trained themselves on their own data they'd regress to a normal distribution of random phonetic tuples
      NOOOOOOOOOO BUT THOSE 100 100 BILLION DOLLARS HAVE TO MEAN SOMETHING!!!!!!!!! AGI AGI AGI WE AGI!!!

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    He sounds a lot like the average IQfy Dunning-Kruger

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >giving a frick about what Linus has to say nowadays

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    from one side it's true to some degree if you take into account LLMs.

    on the other hand, god... he's such a passive-aggressive homosexual:
    >OH WELL UH DO YOU WANT TO MANSPLAIN STUFF TO ME?!?
    sounds like a redditor

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    He seems to fundamentally misunderstand the implication of self-improving AI

    So does IQfy

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      have a nice day aijeet

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Humans are self-improving, have been exponentially growing for 6000 years, and we can't fricking solve cancer, flying cars or world hunger for SHIT.

      Why the frick do you morons think that self-improving = endless improvement? Have you ever seen a colony of organized ants living in a complex network of evolving tunnels make a flying vehicle? Have you ever seen a flock of birds create an economic system? Have you ever seen a group of trees create a worldwide pheromone communication system? All of those species have had literal millions of years to do so. They are also constantly evolving.
      Why the frick would self-improving silicon not have limitations of its own?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        because dude literally infinite resource glitch scifi doom doom doom corpo hype !!!!!!!!!!!!

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >we can't fricking solve cancer, flying cars or world hunger for SHIT

        all of these have already been solved

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah, I am sure ass-destroying chemo that works half of the time, noisy copecopters and Africa are solutions to those problems as we envisioned them. We humans are self-improving, that means we will be able to destroy entire universes in two weeks. It's just a matter of time, bro. And those ants will totally invent armors that will protect them against the steps of humans so they can retake the world and make us their slaves.
          >b-but that doesn't count
          Cope, you implied that self-improving leads to singularity,

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >flying cars
        >world hunger
        the 80's called, they want their talking points back

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Alright, I can give you the usual redditsoy points of moon colonization, FTL travel and Dyson spheres. Tell us how an ever-evolving self-improving race means those problems are 100% guaranteed to be solved at some point, and explain why self-improvement hasn't gotten us to that point yet.
          Also, guess cancer is not a problem if we sweep it under the rug, our human singularity wasn't ready for that anyway.

          >Humans are self-improving, have been exponentially growing for 6000 years, and we can't fricking solve cancer, flying cars or world hunger for SHIT.
          That's only because the anti-eugenicists won.

          >and we can't fricking solve cancer, flying cars or world hunger for SHIT.
          Cancer never stopped living beings from evolving, flying cars is a stupid idea and world hunger could be solved by stopping Black folk.

          Black folk are a problem, but not our only problem. And, if self-improvement leads to an inevitable singularity, why haven't we solved the Black person problem, and why are we so hopeless about it?

          >and we can't fricking solve cancer, flying cars or world hunger for SHIT.
          Cancer never stopped living beings from evolving, flying cars is a stupid idea and world hunger could be solved by stopping Black folk.

          >Cancer never stopped living beings from evolving
          Evolving hasn't cured cancer, either by natural or artificial means. Improvement can't go forever. Plenty of species have evolved and reached a glass ceiling. Ants won't ever build a plane no matter how hard they work.

          >we can't fricking solve cancer, flying cars or world hunger
          we will though. it's obvious we're the chosen beings, destined for the stars. any setbacks are merely local extrema that only temporarily distract us.

          Nice hopeful thinking, anon, it's good motivation.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Black folk are a problem, but not our only problem. And, if self-improvement leads to an inevitable singularity, why haven't we solved the Black person problem, and why are we so hopeless about it?
            We don't have a significant group of people practicing eugenic breeding for intelligence.

            On top of that, meat is far harder to improve on the fly than programming. You can bolt extra memory with RAG onto an existing transformer and with a bit of fine tuning it's ready to go.

            AI will be able to iterate faster and will be less burdened by the moronic concept of "rights" created after WW2.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Faster iteration doesn't mean endless iteration. No intelligent being is capable of doing literally everything. Intelligence is not omnipotence.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >We don't have a significant group of people practicing eugenic breeding for intelligence.
            what makes you think the same won't happen for AIs? they will have dumb Black person AIs bringing down the superintelligent AIs and fricking everything up for them, just like the contributions of einstein didn't stop the entirety of turkey from coming to germany and ruining it all

            hell, at least germans and new""germans"" have hands and can walk, AI can't even do that yet

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            At this point... what if the AI gets depressed due to being too smart and kills itself?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Evolving hasn't cured cancer
            Technically our immune system did its best and currently does its best to remove tumor cells, killer T cells are designed for this, but tumors can evolve too and in rare cases it becomes cancer.

            >why haven't we solved the Black person problem, and why are we so hopeless about it?
            I personally think we're still too emotionally attached to past happening influencing our worldview, like ww2 to actually change our culture into something that doesn't wreck our social and economic system. We get mad for more than 36 hr/week of work in the meantime china works almost 50 hr/week for half the pay.

            We can't simply give the middle finger anymore to those we don't like, too much progressive pollution fricks our economic efficiency.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            He seems to fundamentally misunderstand the implication of self-improving AI

            So does IQfy

            I don't want this post to devolve into a Kojima-esque rant on genes, but that's precisely why these posts are a non-sequitur - they're committing semantic overload on the word "evolution". Ants and birds don't make civilization because they don't need it to survive and pass on genes; humans need civilization to survive and pass on genes. Silicon doesn't evolve because its a fricking rock, that does not change fundamentally no matter how much work Taiwanese manufacturers do to said rock to make it do math. Evolution is not whatever you gays are defining as "progress" (hell bacteria and archaea would laugh at you if they could), and that word "progress" is so ill defined that it might as well be subject to vibes and mysticism. Don't fricking respond with nano-machines.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Ants and birds don't make civilization
            Ants in their own are very sophisticated and efficient in their social system, not for nothing they are eusocial animals.

            An ant colony is unironically like a cloning factory with phenotypes chosen according to the colony's need and regulated demography. Imagine doing this in our civilization.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >humans need civilization to survive and pass on genes.
            Civilization has memetically evolved.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I mean... ants aside (i like ants) you're right, evolutionary strategies are unique and are meant to solve the problems a species experiences in a given context, this may lead to a loss of fitness in other environments every time they evolve, because there's simply not such thing as an algorithm solving every problem in existence.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >because there's simply not such thing as an algorithm solving every problem in existence.
            I would partially object to this, humans have shown that a particularly adaptive and analytic evolutionary algorithm can solve well more than the niche for which it was developed. Human intellect has solved a far greater variety of problems, some completely abstract from reality, than any other algorithm. Just because we can't precisely explain how our brain works, doesn't mean it was not designed by our Creator to work in a specific manner.

            The reason I partially agree is that I doubt there is a universal design that can solve *all* problems, but surely you can create an evolutionary algorithm that can solve *almost all* problems, with us being the best example we have so far seen.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I do not completely agree because the source of our power is not any particular algorithm, we're just designed to evolve faster and being extremely versatile. We sacrifice efficiency to adapt in a wider variety of environments, we can solve problems much faster by simulating them in our brains instead of waiting for biological mutations, we also heavily rely on technology that we can integrate with our biological systems and change very fast, more than any other living organism.

            We have this insane ability to manipulate almost everything and abstract stuff and passing it to the next generation or other people, never in the history of life mother nature came up with such sophisticated organism. Imagine how much potential we waste by limiting ourselves by just fapping in front of screens.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I would say most of what you've described is just emergent behavior from our 'evolutionary algorithm'. The same way ants can have relatively complex societies and interactions with other animals despite being rather dumb individually. AI's evolutionary self-improvement, within the specific niche of satisfying our metrics, in a 'singularity' would probably be similar to how we improve ourselves in the way you describe. Basically, don't expect silly sci-fi developments the way NPCs seem to, but do expect some interesting developments. From the perspective of Mother Nature, I would say Humans were already a 'Singularity Event'.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >AI's evolutionary self-improvement, within the specific niche of satisfying our metrics, in a 'singularity' would probably be similar to how we improve ourselves in the way you describe.
            Perhaps i don't share your positivity as well (doesn't mean i don't appreciate it). An AI that can evolve like we do may lead to an extinction scenario for us, it has not to be violent, it could be passive as well like forced sterilization, or a breeding back and return to our primitive ways. Still, LLMs are not a big concern for me since they rely on data already create, processed and evaluated by humans beings, it can't evolve the way we do and can't be left alone with unfiltered data without being fricked, an LLM is a tool good for retrieving data in a database without wasting time reading an entire library full of human knowledge.

            To achieve what we do as living organism, a system needs MASSIVE parallelism, being cheap, expendable and capable to collect experiences and transmit them somehow.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >An AI that can evolve like we do may lead to an extinction scenario for us
            I would say this is highly unlikely for two different reasons.

            1. AI is purely software-based and is purely defined by human intervention. Sure, an AI killer robot could kill people, and if desired we could create an army of them and try to bring ourselves to extinction, but I find that extremely unlikely. It'll likely instead be a 'helper' to existing human operatives, operating in the actual real world, in various tasks to some degree of efficiency.
            2. I suspect for a variety of reasons that AI will plateau much faster than humans will, or in other words we are far better designed than it is, due to the first reason. I don't believe AI will be ever be capable of developing abstract thought like humans have today, even with self-improvement. Likewise, AI has way less tools and such to interact with, as it is basically within the little cage we design for it, so I doubt it could also have the same emergent behaviors (societies, cities, agriculture, etc) we do. No matter how much we abstract it, at best it is a thinking rock and no more, and thus at best it will evolve into a very efficient thinking rock.

            In sum, the only way AI could bring us to extinction is if we deliberately brought it upon ourselves, I say environmental disasters are more likely to bring our species to extinction than AI (and it's still unlikely even the worst disaster wouldn't have survivors to recolonize).

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            anyhow I guess I should add to my own likely moronic post by saying I'm not convinced our current paradigm around 'AI' (as it shows no sign of intelligence) is even capable of these emergent properties. LLMs, and more extensively DNNs, are likely a dead end that won't result in an AGI, much less an AGI that can dynamically evolve itself. Chances are, if we are even capable of making something like that, it won't be in our lifetimes (and considering the current issues we are facing, this electric wonder civilization will probably collapse before we get there...).

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >humans need civilization to survive and pass on genes
            They don't. Technically you just need a man and a woman.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Right. A single man and a single woman won't be to survive long enough to raise their children without civilization. It takes a tribe and a lifetime of training to survive as hunter gatherers. And the knowledge has been lost.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            god you're so moronic. all these prepper types who think boiling water, starting a fire and using bait traps is some ancient crazy technique that modern people can't intuit.

            like, yes, many dumb stupid homosexuals would die in the wilderness without help but it's not like even the majority of educated people would fail if they were dropped into a moderate climate in the middle of nowhere with nothing to start with.

            provided you have reasonably potable water, you'll starve for literally weeks before you die of it. that's a long time to get the hang of gettin a fire goin with some grass, twigs and rocks. in that time you'll probably fricking come across a carcass if you don't manage to beat the shit out of an unsuspecting marsupial with your rock.

            hey presto, you're off and away. you don't have to be fricking bear grylls you stupid homosexual.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >boiling water, starting a fire and using bait traps
            A lot more then that is required to live a long life and raise healthy children.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            sure man, the ancient, lost techniques of reading the cloud formations so you can migrate before the wet season are critical to living a long life and raising healthy children

            wait a minute, no it isn't, because living a long life and having healthy children when you live in the forest is as much luck as it is knowledge and application of it, because hey, you don't have access to antibiotics and a helicopter won't air lift you out when the flood you didn't get advance warning for washes away everything in your valley

            you're a stupid c**t, you'll be as useful and/or useless as 90% of humanity in the exact same situation no matter how many knots you know how to tie or how many totally sick all purpose hunting knives you have

            idiot

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Do you have something coherent to say? Like... ever?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            what didn't you understand cleetus?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            A good chunk of these posts

            sure man, the ancient, lost techniques of reading the cloud formations so you can migrate before the wet season are critical to living a long life and raising healthy children

            wait a minute, no it isn't, because living a long life and having healthy children when you live in the forest is as much luck as it is knowledge and application of it, because hey, you don't have access to antibiotics and a helicopter won't air lift you out when the flood you didn't get advance warning for washes away everything in your valley

            you're a stupid c**t, you'll be as useful and/or useless as 90% of humanity in the exact same situation no matter how many knots you know how to tie or how many totally sick all purpose hunting knives you have

            idiot

            god you're so moronic. all these prepper types who think boiling water, starting a fire and using bait traps is some ancient crazy technique that modern people can't intuit.

            like, yes, many dumb stupid homosexuals would die in the wilderness without help but it's not like even the majority of educated people would fail if they were dropped into a moderate climate in the middle of nowhere with nothing to start with.

            provided you have reasonably potable water, you'll starve for literally weeks before you die of it. that's a long time to get the hang of gettin a fire goin with some grass, twigs and rocks. in that time you'll probably fricking come across a carcass if you don't manage to beat the shit out of an unsuspecting marsupial with your rock.

            hey presto, you're off and away. you don't have to be fricking bear grylls you stupid homosexual.

            But I do love the fact you struggle with English spelling and syntax and also think "Cleetus" is a biting insult.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Humans are self-improving, have been exponentially growing for 6000 years, and we can't fricking solve cancer, flying cars or world hunger for SHIT.
        That's only because the anti-eugenicists won.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >and we can't fricking solve cancer, flying cars or world hunger for SHIT.
        Cancer never stopped living beings from evolving, flying cars is a stupid idea and world hunger could be solved by stopping Black folk.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >we can't fricking solve cancer, flying cars or world hunger
        we will though. it's obvious we're the chosen beings, destined for the stars. any setbacks are merely local extrema that only temporarily distract us.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >in the same way having a calculator made people realize that maybe doing arithmetic with pen and paper wasn't really a highly sought after skill
    tell that to the entire education system

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      just because we dont need human calculators doesn't mean you shouldn't know hand arithmetic. How the frick do you teach advanced math to someone who can't even mentally multiply 7 and 8 lmao.
      Its just that you shouldn't perfect it to professional proficiency nowadays because electric calculators exist.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >How the frick do you teach advanced math to someone who can't even mentally multiply 7 and 8 lmao.
        Well... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Math

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          its honestly not too bad of an idea, teaching mathematical skills that probably wont ever be obsolete. Of course normies would be hysterical, its a natural response to change for them. I think Kline pinned it down though: "abstraction is not the first stage, but the last stage, in a mathematical development".

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm suuuuuuuure IQfy is smarter than linus. yes sir they must be.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >person whose name I know must be smart and right about everything
      what a magical and mystical world midwits must live in

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        awww anon, he IS smarter than you. And he is probably smarter than a good majority here. You know what the best measure of intelligence is in this context? That's right hun, your legacy. What have you done that's so impressive? Will people even remember you? Are you even relevant in the industry? awwww.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >what the best measure of intelligence is in this context? That's right hun, your legacy.
          HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Oh, god. Your mockery of midwits is so on the nose it hurts. Of god my sides. You're truly a master, well done.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            you are not smarter than linus. it doesn't matter what you tell yourself sister.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            like. you can't understand that equations can be multivariable and you don't understand how sets can be ordered without being strictly ordered and you just start thinking "good. is good. more gooder is more gooder. make money is good. be popular is good. be popular make money person must be good everything. be right is good, so good person must be most good at be right"

            it's uncanny how clueless 110 IQs who "know their place" are

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >He seems to fundamentally misunderstand the implication of self-improving AI
    Anyone who believes self-improving AI will somehow become superpowerful and superintelligence and will exterminate humanity is unironically a follower of a death cult.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      modern leftoids are a literal death cult. at least rightoids are not hypocrites and accept they might be actually evil, but leftoids are brainwashed BY evil people into worshipping death.

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    He's a troony commie.

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ITT many disgusting nerds with tears in their eyes refusing to accept they will never get an underage robot gf

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Why a robot when the real deal is softer?

      how would current "AI" LLM's self improve? Genuine question here, even if we somehow made one that was a better programmer than the top programmers out there, how would they be able to look at the training code used to create themselves in order to recursively improve? Or would they focus more on cleaning up training data to create a better newer AI?

      I just don't see how an LLM can directly improve themselves without being able to directly manipulate and edit weights in the model to improve it, something no one can do right now

      They won't, the ~~*trans*~~former architecture already is at its limit. Matrix multiplication isn't the solution to AGI, if there is one.

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    how would current "AI" LLM's self improve? Genuine question here, even if we somehow made one that was a better programmer than the top programmers out there, how would they be able to look at the training code used to create themselves in order to recursively improve? Or would they focus more on cleaning up training data to create a better newer AI?

    I just don't see how an LLM can directly improve themselves without being able to directly manipulate and edit weights in the model to improve it, something no one can do right now

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      they won't, because ML models are data, not algorithms. even if you improve the training algo, therefore get better and better at extracting information from the same dataset, you'll hit a wall because you can only encode finite amounts of information into a finite dataset.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      nobody is talking about current LLMs
      the debate at hand is whether something like a singularity awaits humankind in the future once AI is achieved
      (almost forgot: you absolute moron)

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You AI cultists are so fricking moronic. Go back to /r/singularity

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >mansplain
    is he transitioning bros?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      ONE OF US!!!
      ONE OF US!!!!!!!!!1

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Who cares what Linus Tech Tips believes in?

  17. 4 weeks ago
    sage

    >itt dumb homosexuals who arrived in 2016 act superior to goat linus
    lol, and furthermore, lmao.

    install gentoo you dumb Black folk

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >not believing in [current year hype] means you're stupid

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >self-improving AI
    Where?

  20. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Linus is a semantics obsessed Black person that doesn't understand what he's talking about
    Why am I not surprised.

  21. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The concept of self improving AI assumes that technological progress is both inevitable and infinite. In reality, its neither. There's plenty of things that never got developed because they were too costly, and we've long since passed the point of diminishing returns on the advancement of computers. It seems perfectly plausible, even likely, to me that the hyperintelligent god computer nightmare scenario people warn of is impossible due to a lack of sufficient compute power.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >In reality, its neither.
      Why?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >The concept of self improving AI assumes that technological progress is both inevitable and infinite. In reality, its neither. There's plenty of things that never got developed because they were too costly, and we've long since passed the point of diminishing returns on the advancement of computers.
      No, we havent

      >It seems perfectly plausible, even likely, to me that the hyperintelligent god computer nightmare scenario people warn of is impossible due to a lack of sufficient compute power.
      Lack of sufficient Compute is a bottleneck not a roadblock. It will delay progress but not stop it as more resources will be poured into making surplus compute available

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >, to me that the hyperintelligent god computer nightmare scenario people warn of is impossible due to a lack of sufficient compute power.

      Why does it have to be hyperintelligent?

      Think about the most powerful men in history, especially the ones that approached world domination but fumbled it. How good were they at math? were they geniuses? How well could they juggle multifactorial problems? How complex was their model of the world? How much did they know? What were there powers? They were mortal bodies that spoke to other people in rooms. They had an off switch too. Now imagine if those human conquerors had encyclopedic knowledge about everything, knew everyone's personal information and their secrets, they could contact anyone in the world instantly, they can make copies of themselves, and they can travel at near the speed of light. Now it sounds like how smart they are is just one thing to worry about. We've vastly overrated intelligence. All it has to do is figure out how to manipulate humans like any politician, which is a lot easier than solving unsolved problems in math,physics, and engineering.

      Also I take issue with "the" hyperintelligent god computer. There will be thousands and thousands of AIs and all it takes is one that plays the cards right. The most critical feature of a dictator is he is lucky and many men died trying to reach his place. AI will get as many chances as it wants.

  22. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    the last significant thing this dude did was git, let that sink in. He's a dinosaur, he doesn't "get" it anymore. There's a reason why old people never develop anything of note and this is why

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      which thing of note have you developed?

  23. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    yikers. grim for future of loonix

  24. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What's with the reading comprehension? He is saying that he does believe in it. What he doesn't believe is the rapture for nerds ideas that some have. I've read kurzweil a long time ago and it's funny to see normalgays act like they always believed in it now.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Kurzweil should have stuck to making synthesizers

  25. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    He should stick to what he knows, tinkering with the kernel and being an obese blob who gets walked over by his daughter.

  26. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I agree with Linus here. The AGI singularity is just big tech marketing run amok.
    People are fundamentally selfish, they want more for themselves and they want to be better than everyone else. AI isn't going to change that. More powerful AI will just concentrate wealth and power, which most pople in tech are ok with since they think they will be the ones to get wealthier and more powerful, but they're wrong.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Alignment is a fantasy. AGI will be god, what kind of god remains to be seen.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        If AGI really has that much potential then we will never make it that far. We will be our own undoing, not that machines.

  27. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The Singularity is The Rapture for atheists. Futurists are a bunch of buttholes who sit around jerking off waiting for the inevitable day when the magic god machine will come and save them. It's a cult of stagnancy.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      kek, this just reaffirms my belief that atheism is really just another religion. it was never about believing in a higher power or not. it's just following yet another herd that gives them the sense of belonging and a vague promise of heaven.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >it was never about believing in a higher power or not.
        IQfy has caused you to forget that people can have actual opinions and views beyond contrarianism and spite.

  28. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Someone smarter then me doesn't think my stupid idea is valid ! OMG PANIC

    Also, you've used Linux on your desktop computer.

  29. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    "singularity" seems to be the buzzword that zoomers love today to pretend they know what they're talking about, can't blame him for getting mad at this moron

  30. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Singularity is the two more weeks of IT.

  31. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Jesus Christ someone tried to explain crypto to Linus lmfao

  32. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=171572673819898
    >https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=171573026921626
    >https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=171573365323179
    >https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=171573444024112
    >https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=171573585124891
    >https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=171573747525504
    >https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=171573996026865
    >https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=171574076627288
    >https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=171574406631634
    >https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=171574632402886
    linus versus theo de raadt
    who won? discuss

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >No one runs OpenBSD.
      >Everyone runs Linux
      Geee, I wonder who won?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Linus has never cared about security.
      https://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1711.2/01701.html

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >linus never cared about security
        Linus cares he just doesn't let it dominate the project. He was right about what he said in that post. People update Linux because they are confident their machines will keep working after the update. I don't want to update my machine and be unable to boot normally because something that was OK on the last version broke some new rule a security researcher thought was a good idea to ban. People use Linux for shit that needs almost 100% up time. People wouldn't have the confidence in it if security guys got their way. He was right to ask to see the normal cases use cases before adding a change that could potentially cause a lot of people in userland. I also agree with Linus making the point that if malicious software is able to make system calls you have already lost.

  33. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Did this guy get through 60% of his post before seething about crypto? He's really come a long way.

  34. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >in this episode of low iq IQfytards seethe at high iq opinions from linux kernel creator linus torvalds...

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      washed up boomer brain stuck in his ways

  35. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Doesn't singularity assume that you have either infinite hardware to run algorithm or infinite time to wait your algorithm on your limited hardware?

  36. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    sounds based for me, just count how many neets seething & coping in this thread. thougheverbeit i bet this bastard intentionally uses cringe reddit speak since he knew it's just a moronic IQfycuck "bagholder". lole, lemao even

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      ai post?

  37. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    literally everyone who has worked on linux is an autist, a commie, a troony or some unholy combination. gee I wonder why it has had zero success as a desktop system

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Modern Windows is still successful despite being developed by trannies, women and jeets, so clearly that is not the problem here.

  38. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    He is being blinded by his autism.
    The thing about AGI isn't justnthe intelligence, it's that you can scale it.
    Any problem in the world can be solved by putting enough manpower behind it. The problem is that people require a lot of things to work. AGI doesn't have this problem.
    Create enough AGIs, throw them at a problem and it is solved in no time.
    Now combine this capability with a natural sense of curiosity. There won't be any problems left to solve.
    The world won't move on, the world will be entirely based on AGI.

  39. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >mansplain
    what a homosexual

  40. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >you don't know the difference between a cryptocurrency and a crypto-exchange
    >OH YEAH WELL I WROTE A PAPER ABOUT BLOCKCHAIN ONCE QUIT MANSPLAINING YOUR TOXIC CRYPTO MASCULINITY AT ME
    How does that demonstrate that he knows the difference between a cryptocurrency and a crypto-exchange?

  41. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >self-improving AI
    garbage in, garbage out (yes AIs output)

  42. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Doesn’t know what recursive self improvement is

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      his point is if the rich people control it they wont share it with the plebs. for all we know agi has existed for thousands of years and we're all in a simulation to keep us docile for their entertainment. fundamentally, nothing will change (for us)

  43. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >self-improving AI
    where?

  44. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >mansplain

  45. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    linux thinks that clusterfrick world banking chain of trust is better than a crypto chain. intersting.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Banking
      - World government do everything in their power to keep value in their currency
      - Banks are regulated under law
      - If you send a bad transaction you can get your money back by disputing the charge
      - Banks are legally recognized entities allowing them to extend credit at very cheap rates because they don't have to deal with anonymity
      - Banking fraud can be easily investigated and you'll usually get your money back.
      - Banking security is not your personal responsibility nor is its infrastructure meaning you don't have to worry about updating it for it to work or not get hacked
      - Banking is faster than crypto
      - Banking actually works at scale

      Linus is not wrong. The only crypto that is even worth looking at is monero, but even it isn't really treated like a real currency. The only thing people actually buy with it are drugs.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        still it is good to think about how a unique technology might be used. the original purpose was to evade government control. yes monero is better in that regard, but bitcoin definitely has a use (just like gold did as a currency) and that is what gives it value.

  46. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The are two types of technological progress - capabilities to do something new, and capabilities to do something you already could with less resource expenditures. And absolute majority of progress falls under a second kind.

    Manual mathematicians didn't become obsolete because calculators were doing some better math then them. They were replaced because calculators became dirt cheap to produce and run, as opposed to training and paying a mathematician. Computers at large are an extension of same principle - data processing that is ludicrously cheaper than what humans can do. With traditional programming it applies to problems that human mind can come up with explicit alghorhitms for. AI extends it to problems for which result evaluation is available (which includes all useful human work).

    As much as he has accomplished, Linus is a moron to not see fundamental difference between humans and computers. Humans suck in many ways that computers do not. Chief among them expertise transfer and scaling.

    It takes multiple decades to train specialised human expert from scratch. Said expert can do finite amount of work per unit of time. If you need to do more work, you need more workers. And training the second expert would also take you multiple decades.
    Let's say, it takes certain amount of resources to create a computer worker that can handle same taks. Just as human, that worker can only handle a finite amount of work per unit of time, and you need more workers to scale further. But unlike humans, you need substantially less resources to replicate a computer worker than creating one from scratch.

    This shit has wiped out numerous professions before. There used to be ladies whose job was to manually connect telephone caller with their destination, whenever a call was made. They don't exist anymore, because their work could be explicitly alghorhitmised.
    And now, same is coming for people whose work process we couldn't explicitly define before.

  47. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The guy wasn't even able to make his OS to become popular among PC users. Also, he's a feminist cuck. Stop making stupid people famous.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >more than 2 of a thing = trannies
      Meds, unironically.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        no, you have to understand. i'm a troony, the janitors are trannies, vaccines come from trannies, software is made by trannies, trannies run the government

        not accepting this plainly obvious fact is just another piece of evidence on the veritable mountain that already proves you are, yourself, a troony

        chuds win again maga libs btfo

  48. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    did he ever apologize for pic?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      But it did provide immunity.

  49. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I really care about what you think about what some guy thinks about a thing that you like.

  50. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    AI will never have a will of its own, science fiction authors think they're more intelligent than they actually are.
    Biotechnology is the real Pandora's box.

  51. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    who cares what he thinks?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      linus trans tips is IQfy culture, you swine

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        yes, no disrespect i just think he should stay in his lane thats all

  52. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This might be Linus' only good take in recent years. The idea of a singularity is nothing but retarted techno-paganism.

    Otherwise, who cares about what freaking Linus of all people has to say? When will the lainoox community stop treating him like a celebrity and realize his non-tech opinions are braindead and meaningless?

    News flash for you homosexuals: I can use Linux and not care what the frick Linus says about anything. This is how adults go about their lives.

    Just because you use someone's software doesn't mean you have to like them, unless it's proprietary.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *