Aidan Clark
@aidanclark.bsky.social
I train models @ OpenAI.
Previously Research at DeepMind.
Hae sententiae verbaque mihi soli sunt.
Previously Research at DeepMind.
Hae sententiae verbaque mihi soli sunt.
> and those were objectively superior to horses in several ways
Do you think there is no angle along which ChatGPT is objectively better than the thing replacing it?
Do you think there is no angle along which ChatGPT is objectively better than the thing replacing it?
March 29, 2025 at 10:42 PM
> and those were objectively superior to horses in several ways
Do you think there is no angle along which ChatGPT is objectively better than the thing replacing it?
Do you think there is no angle along which ChatGPT is objectively better than the thing replacing it?
And to be clear — none of the arguments you’re making are in the essay! The essay is making arguments which are far far weaker, and mostly revolve around trivializing what AI is currently capable of.
March 29, 2025 at 10:14 PM
And to be clear — none of the arguments you’re making are in the essay! The essay is making arguments which are far far weaker, and mostly revolve around trivializing what AI is currently capable of.
Do you think the first cars were cheaper or more reliable than a horse? You can call me overly ambitious for making this connection, but you must also see the precedent.
March 29, 2025 at 10:09 PM
Do you think the first cars were cheaper or more reliable than a horse? You can call me overly ambitious for making this connection, but you must also see the precedent.
I think it’s reasonable to say “these essays aren’t yet that good” (they’re not!) and “this stuff costs a crazy amount of money upfront” (it does!), but that’s not the argument an essay like this makes; the essay says “this is going nowhere”, and that, to me, I find so hard to sympathize with.
March 29, 2025 at 9:47 PM
I think it’s reasonable to say “these essays aren’t yet that good” (they’re not!) and “this stuff costs a crazy amount of money upfront” (it does!), but that’s not the argument an essay like this makes; the essay says “this is going nowhere”, and that, to me, I find so hard to sympathize with.
But we’re talking about capabilities, not profits. **we couldn’t do this 5 years ago**, and now we can. It’s crazy to call that fumes!!!!
March 29, 2025 at 9:44 PM
But we’re talking about capabilities, not profits. **we couldn’t do this 5 years ago**, and now we can. It’s crazy to call that fumes!!!!
I’m so confused by seeing technology that has progressed from garbled sentences to being able to write many college-level essays over a span of just 6 years…. And concluding that the field is all fumes. Just mid. I’m incredulous.
March 29, 2025 at 7:24 PM
I’m so confused by seeing technology that has progressed from garbled sentences to being able to write many college-level essays over a span of just 6 years…. And concluding that the field is all fumes. Just mid. I’m incredulous.
Idk I feel like our job needs to be partially educational but I don’t know how to reach folks who aren’t interested in listening.
March 29, 2025 at 3:11 PM
Idk I feel like our job needs to be partially educational but I don’t know how to reach folks who aren’t interested in listening.
Posted on Bluesky because my Twitter will be an echo chamber of agreement.
March 29, 2025 at 2:29 PM
Posted on Bluesky because my Twitter will be an echo chamber of agreement.
It’s hard for me to take the opposing camp against AI seriously (those saying AI isn’t very good, not the camp which says it’s unjust) when their proponents essays are so filled with rhetorical tricks (ending by aligning AI to DOGE?!?!?) and a lack of desire to seriously grapple with AI’s value.
March 29, 2025 at 2:29 PM
It’s hard for me to take the opposing camp against AI seriously (those saying AI isn’t very good, not the camp which says it’s unjust) when their proponents essays are so filled with rhetorical tricks (ending by aligning AI to DOGE?!?!?) and a lack of desire to seriously grapple with AI’s value.
Unfortunately everyone serious (vis-a-via being a real scientist) refuses to engage on the topic in good faith. I’ve legitimately considered writing papers in the conference where the anti-AI congregate just to force them to the table….
March 4, 2025 at 5:44 AM
Unfortunately everyone serious (vis-a-via being a real scientist) refuses to engage on the topic in good faith. I’ve legitimately considered writing papers in the conference where the anti-AI congregate just to force them to the table….
The most impressive paper I read is a paper which tells me the authors were able to convincingly show me that an empirical statement about deep neural networks holds true in a general way.
March 1, 2025 at 5:00 PM
The most impressive paper I read is a paper which tells me the authors were able to convincingly show me that an empirical statement about deep neural networks holds true in a general way.
A few years ago the best work was to do focused small scale architecture/data innovation, but I feel increasingly unable to trustfully extrapolate innovation from small scale. That’s why extrapolative-science-as-artifact is so valuable.
February 28, 2025 at 4:54 PM
A few years ago the best work was to do focused small scale architecture/data innovation, but I feel increasingly unable to trustfully extrapolate innovation from small scale. That’s why extrapolative-science-as-artifact is so valuable.
It’s been eye opening to me how much AI people (a) enjoy LLM poetry as capability examples but (b) have a remarkably surface-level understanding of what makes for good poetry
February 28, 2025 at 4:17 PM
It’s been eye opening to me how much AI people (a) enjoy LLM poetry as capability examples but (b) have a remarkably surface-level understanding of what makes for good poetry
this is also a comment on the problem with modern governments
January 17, 2025 at 6:22 PM
this is also a comment on the problem with modern governments
It does seem emblematic of the problem with modern society that this company is lodging a court case instead of asking the government "hey, can you adjust the law so that this requirement is generalized to the extent where we can helpfully comply"
January 17, 2025 at 6:22 PM
It does seem emblematic of the problem with modern society that this company is lodging a court case instead of asking the government "hey, can you adjust the law so that this requirement is generalized to the extent where we can helpfully comply"
I don’t care so much about the charity more about the blind trust.
January 11, 2025 at 10:27 PM
I don’t care so much about the charity more about the blind trust.
+1 this is pretty clear virtue signaling IMO
January 8, 2025 at 7:25 AM
+1 this is pretty clear virtue signaling IMO
you’re telling me he _went up into a tree_?!?!?
January 2, 2025 at 12:12 AM
you’re telling me he _went up into a tree_?!?!?