> AGI won't come anytime in 20X, where X is under 40

Honestly, I think that's quite generous. And I only phrase it that way, rather than more like "that X should be 99" because trying to predict more than about 15 years out in tech, especially when it comes to breakthroughs, is a fool's errand.

But that's what it's going to take to reach AGI: a genuine unforeseeable breakthrough that lets us do new things with machine learning/AI that we fundamentally couldn't do before. Just feeding LLMs more and more stuff won't get them there—and they're already way into the diminishing-returns territory.

>Honestly, I think that's quite generous. And I only phrase it that way, rather than more like "that X should be 99" because trying to predict more than about 15 years out in tech, especially when it comes to breakthroughs, is a fool's errand.

I know! I set a rather low one to avoid having all the HN LLM Koolaid drinkers and LLM astroturfers have a go at it

So is the lifestyle being subsidized that of those researchers Zuck hired for $100M? That's a meaningfully different usage of the phrase than the original "millennial lifestyle subsidy" to the point where the comparison isn't useful. Or again, is it just the fact AI products are being offered below cost?

The case for pessimism looks something like:

- Generative AI, at a below market cost, eats the internet and becomes the primary entry point

- Some combination of price hikes and service degradation, ads etc, make generative ai kinda shitty

- We’re stuck with kinda shitty generative ai products because the old internet is gone

This is the standard enshitification loop really

Don't forget about 'sponsored content' and ads appearing in the shitty AI results.

Are they subsidizing it?

Training is definitely "subsidized". Some think it's an investment, but with the pace of advancement, depreciation is high. Free users are subsidized, bit their data is grist for the training mill so arguably they come under the training subsidy. /

Is paid inference subsidized? I don't think it is by much.

I would wait until 2100.

> The world's richest

... or your defined-benefits pension fund trying desperately to stay solvent.