Misleading, this is similar to tracking product progress by the number of features shipped. Any crypto startup still alive can give you 20 items bullet list of things done past month, but how much of that actually changed a thing....

Unfortunately on this list only the Alpha Fold item is significant

>ed between 2013 and 2023? How about in mining? Metallurgy? Shipping? Logistics? Battery tech? Automation? Farming? agriculture? Computational analysis?

Exactly that! - extreme case of cherry picking/

If I judge by evolution of a toaster in past 20 years, oh boy the progress is really shit, toaster still toasts 2 slices of bread (while our exponential expectations were about toasting 1 billion slices) it still does not talk, does not walk and does not please you sexualy, still requires electricity and all - zero progress, how can one expect any thing to come out from AI, LEV or fusion if toasters are still like that.

Why did 2003 to 2013 feel like more progress - because of OP's lens / myopic view / confirmation bias.

Lets see the facts and debunk it:

1. Invention of an iPhone - randomly pick any PDA, say Cassiopeia A-10 that was released in 1997! thats 6 years before 2003, to people who owned it an Iphone was just "another evolution" and for longest time "not a real smartphone" because nokia was able to run Java apps one could install without a need for an app store. - what does it mean, iPhone nailed UX and amplified with a power of Brand and Marketing, the revolution started far before thought.
2. Social media revolution... ICQ gained wide spread popularity in 1998....
3. Have been happening every year since video games existed, from 3dfx voodoo cards to real time shadows, there were no exact slow down or acceleration - its pretty much an compound growth graph.
4. Video streaming? Quicktime or first video calls ? again broadband speeds increase similarly to video game graphics this trend was not different if you zoom out from 2003 or 2013.)
5. https://ourworldindata.org/internet you can see for yourself that there is minor difference with mostly only North America getting to a close to maximum penetration.

This is very clearly a very narrow, consumer electronics and experience focused view, I am openly criticizing it not because I want to hype the short singularity timelines but simply because it is not factual, its cherry picked, apples vs oranges + industry focused bias derived.

- 2013 to 2023 things that actually happened from Crispr, to us having CPUs fabricated on five to ten times smaller nanometer scale vs those in 2013 are a massive progress.

- 2016 AI wins at GO - this felt like humans landing on the moon or going to space for the first time.

- see number of records in Fusion energy development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_nuclear_fusionI can make a very long list of things that are evolutionary (like iPhone) but also revolutionary an not expected (like Ai progress, Fusion, etc) for every decade and if anything there is acceleration of progress not other way around.

I would love to be proven wrong but in a constructive manner not in biased tunnel-vision way lol ;-)

This is a very good point, I wonder if Aurora supports such performance stacking, I suspect it does not. So 10 Exaflop compute power should be something available for a single application at a same time not a distributed computational power available within the network for example. In other words I am interested to identify a projected performance of a chip per square nanometer or any other metric and then see if we are are actually able to deliver that faster or slower than projected in a 5 years timeline.

We can then extrapolate that observation to singularity timeline.

It's funny how one can write a whole article full of details and yet not see that it logically collapses at a very basic, foundational understanding of the topic.

Chat GPT has no model of the world it operates in, it does not "understand" what it says, you absolutely cannot evolve that into AGI.

You can, however, have a very smart ai systems based on it that would accelerate human progress across multiple domains. Or you can fake it and make it feel as if it understands the context to make the user experience better but functionality it would not work, it's an "expert" type of an ai.

AGI by 2025 is possible, but chat GPT is a sign of overall industry progress not progress towards AGI necessarily, if we were able to have an AI that acted as a dog with all the consequences like ability to train it with voice and gesture commands, teaching it to solve a dynamic puzzle like managing a bunch of sheep in a field and then have it perform those tasks and learn to do better over time - that would be a very clear sign of progress to AGI and we do have some projects around that, chat GPT is not one of them.

I know reversing grey hair is not directly related to curing aging, but I think of it as of a sign for progress.

If we get a really working supplement or therapy that restores natural hair color by the end of 2025 I would say it would be a good sign that we are on the path to decode, prototype and eventually solve aging as well, to me its simple - lets see how fast something as simple as grey hair gets reversed

>t please try to separate the hype from reality. LEV is not going to happen in the next 20 years like a lot of people here claim. We are decades and decades away from even having treatments for aging, let alone curing it or reaching LEV.

absolutely my point, yes compounding change and industry convergence. We do have both targeted efforts (attempts to cure aging) and potentially synergetic non targeted efforts (from development of AI to better scanning, diagnostics, better materials, lasers, smaller particles, etc etc). LEV in 20 years may or may not happen and if we are not goign to see signs in the next 5 years we can self organize to try pushing the progress but I am more optimistic than before.

This is great for two reasons:

Short term (5 years) we will get a couple of new materials that would not otherwise be discovered and yet they would be fit for mass production (unlike graphene). I believe this will bring us few cool things in few years.

Long term (10 years) once u can pair this solution with an AGI and an access to production facilities, work flow design and operations u can expect a solution vertically, meaning we not only discover a material but we are at the same time solve for its production, handling and applications and that is where singularity comes...

I recall all 3 periods, but 2012 to 2022 is what I want to focus on.

Mobile phones, we had them in 2012 but they did not feel or worked like you could just do anything you wanted with one, not all web sites worked as great on mobile, and they would not charge fast, but battery would die quickly, cameras on the phones were not comparable to a dedicated camera.

If you take a foldable from today u do feel that the device came from a different era, not just a generation ahead but a difference u would have feel between a computer made in 1995 and computer in 2015 that leap but in 10 Years.

Cars were not smart at all, comparing S class from 2012 to the one from 2022 is absolutely shocking.

2012 we did not have real smart home experience, voice controlled, easy to integrate etc, cross apps and all, smart home was more of a conceptual thing.

2012 had no real time working powerfull ai for image recognition or speech.

2012 did not have really smart wearables, even Apple watch first generation from 2015 did not have a killer feature.

That being said I think the leap in past decade was massive especially in things you u don't see, we did not think we can make 1nm scale processors back in 2012, we thought the hard limit was around whatever 10nm? Diagnostics and genome related progress, material science, those things moved so much in 10 years that I bet it feels like a hundred years has passed

There was another post about the same team that had a video about the approach, and one of the interviewed experts had a same concern even though he said that so far they don't see that happening

Yes and no, neurolink as a solution for blindness is a use a case, it's legit, but if this device offers similar resolution why do brain implant... I think that's what the title is about

Its a solution against blindness though... not becoming one with the machines :)

Well .. I want to argue and offer the following two points:

1 - proposed solution uses optical nerve that already in place, it is a legit way for BCI when talking about vision (as in eyes)... invasive way would still end up replacing optic nerve and in that sense would be anyway more efficient.

2 - this idea of invasive is very silo / extrapolation of today's tech, what if in 20 years what we would end up actually using would be a bunch of nano machines that work in the brain and then send / receive signals as an interface, it would be completely different from Neurolink approach as well, we should not get fixated on invasive vs non invasive we should fixate on the quality of solution.

I would argue that this CRISPR and what we had in 2014 is far from being the same, the initial version was a great concept but did not live up to standards, even current iteration only shows double digit improvement but not in all people and is not what we hoped to see when we first read about slicing and re programming, however I am hopeful that there is an acceleration, baby steps but we are increasing the impact...

Ok so if we are to extrapolate 2022 milestones from Alpha Fold to MidJourney etc...

What I would keep in mind - we are still only getting computational advancements at x2 (or slightly less) per roughly 3 years and not for all sort of computational tasks it is unrealistic to expect any leaps forward due to compute getting much cheaper or scalability much more accessible (that is happening 2025).

However we do have greater than computational advances in AI and various applications of machine learning.

Predictions:

- Stock Trading AI - totally possible to make but requires a startup interested in making it :) (not a trading bot the way they are today, but a legit machine learning based, news reading, technical analysis performing, and risk assessing agent).

- All sort of generative art based products - but a new milestone is a simple video game that makes itself as you play (in fact its a AI video generator but UX wise its a video game).

- New generation of smart toys, robot dogs etc, yes there have been a few Kickstarter projects in 2022 but I think 2023 is when we gonna get a robot pet / companion presented that would WOW us.

- I hope for medical discovery done with AI that breaks some 50 year old unsolved problem but I am not an expert to imagine what that exactly going to be.

Last point I think is a spot on, basically a productized Cheracter ai or gpt3 that does a very different thing and AI is more of an interface, think of a new gen of a budget, event planner, health or sports apps, email assistant, may be grocery + cooking advice

People and even public markets are oblivious to what is coming in just about 5 to 7 years ....

I wonder if Full dive VR comments come from people who Watched Pantheon or something and that concept became stronger?

Context wise - I dont see FDVR as any precursor to singularity. Sure its nice tech concept but to me it sounds like expecting holograms, that was a thing, and we just dont see tech evolving to that direction too much, we do have holographic 2Pac, and its all we needed.

I advice to first think of how do we define impact? Lets say you are a brick and mortar worker selling vegetables... Your social security data, your bank account, your medical data, the way vegetables are grown, they way people find your store on the map - all of those have changed completely in the past 10-15 years. If Singularity and AGI come around 2030 - those will change again and to a greater extend, but will you still be selling vegetables? Well we are most likely not changing our bodies to such extremes that we branch too far from the human condition of today so yes you may still be selling vegetables...

>lly believe as my hypothesis (with some logic and research) tha

We can try to track this, for example pick something like Parkinson's, if age reversal is 2060 when do we fix Parkinson's? 2050? Lets put that on a map and wait, and lets do that with hundred other predictions.

I wasn't specifically talking about you but rather that it's not as important how we call things, what they do and how it changes our life is what importan, it's the industry thing, we have "proto agi" and lots of other terms that don't need to exist, I feel.

100% Agree on the pace, I would try not to get fixated on a specific term or try to coin a new one, if you are playful with terminology you could argue AGI is already available, so is machine - human symbiosis when you look at a scale of a whole planet.

What I am interested in is to map the milestones that we expect to happen in 5 years time and see if they do come in 2025 (in half the time)...

To all of you who wonder it science never leaves the lab - medical takes longer than material science for example, but don't you all remember foldable displays being showcased at trade shows for like 4 years and we all thought "this never gonna go into co sumer product, it's vapor", and now we are at 4th gen consumer foldables and people aren't even surprised with those. Take Samsung flip and take it to a timeline 15 Years back - it looks and feels like a movie prop, no way it's real..

Medicine is the same we know it, in 1960, 1990 etc people were hearing about scientific concepts and those are now in the mass market from Lasik, to some Stem Cells therapies to HIV that used to be a death sentence similar to rare forms of cancer today, it not longer is....

Pace is a bit irritatingly slow compared to GPU progress and ability to simulate water in fps games (kidding) but it is also getting faster...

Yes, mine is a He and it has an opening that looks like a mouth of a pacman with amethyst crystals in there, so I pet it for sucking the bad energy :)

I have a pet rock...