SneerClub

1293 readers

2 users here now

Hurling ordure at the TREACLES, especially those closely related to LessWrong.

AI-Industrial-Complex grift is fine as long as it sufficiently relates to the AI doom from the TREACLES. (Though TechTakes may be more suitable.)

This is sneer club, not debate club. Unless it's amusing debate.

[Especially don't debate the race scientists, if any sneak in - we ban and delete them as unsuitable for the server.]

See our twin at Reddit

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

self@awful.systems

blakestacey@awful.systems

dgerard@awful.systems

Checking in on AI 2027 a year later (awful.systems)

submitted 6 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) by lurker@awful.systems to c/sneerclub@awful.systems

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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%)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] lurker@awful.systems 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Looked at AI 2027 tracker again and the way they grade the predictions is weird 80% accuracy is somehow both confirmed accurate and only partially accurate? huh?? why?? they do provide a grading criteria and 80% is listed as "largely accurate", yet for some reason they don't put that on the grading? It's either confirmed or partially accurate