logoalt Hacker News

echelontoday at 2:31 PM9 repliesview on HN

And all of these things will be solved one by one.

It's astounding to me that people can see coding get solved and not think every single one of these tasks won't be solved too.

Why do you not think these things aren't going to be completely automated? What makes these tasks special?

Fable and Astra can one-shot video games with compelling novel game loops. They can do systems programming, distributed systems, robotics. I haven't found a weak point.

Seedance 2.5 can make video better than the manual labor of VFX artists, 3D artists, and animators.

Nano Banana and GPT Image can do a better job than graphics designers.

LLMs just solved a Millennium Prize Problem, and there are probably more that will fall in the coming weeks.

Just wait. All of these things will be solved.

There is no "stopping point".

Edit:

Don't anticipate that 2036 will look anything like 2026.

Will Smith spaghetti doesn't stay that way forever. Trillions of dollars will be spent on solving these problems. They will be solved.


Replies

bigstrat2003today at 4:11 PM

> It's astounding to me that people can see coding get solved...

We haven't seen that. Maybe when we do, we will start to believe that other things will get solved.

sigbottletoday at 2:37 PM

May the iterative loop of adding new axes to evaluate on be a natural, healthy progression, instead of needing to frame it as an us-them problem?

If you value humans intrinsically, this is necessarily the loop that will converge. I don't think humans have deep intensional a priori knowledge of the structure of reality. If we did, then we wouldn't need tools like AI because we'd be a superset of that. We can only observe and judge.

If we don't value humans, then sure, I think AI is at the point where it can kill all humans (conditional on sentience and resources etc). Two ways to solve a problem - solve the problem, or eliminate the problem statement. Plenty of easier vectors to eliminate the "problem statement", than say, try to solve problems such as making human life better. If you do value the latter though, there will necessarily be human judgers. That's how it works.

mbernsteintoday at 2:38 PM

I think you need to define what solved means and what better means.

Have you tried one-shotting real distributed systems problems? What was the result and how did you verify correctness?

show 1 reply
danbructoday at 2:37 PM

I have no doubt that AI will eventually be able to write essentially perfect code, I am just saying that we are still quite far away from that point.

BowBuntoday at 2:37 PM

> compelling novel game loops

Tell that to the mountain of failed AI slop games on Steam! As a game dev, building compelling, fun games is not even something humans are good at doing consistently. The AI can build the tech, but it can't make something 'fun' yet (unless your bar for fun is simply that a tool created a thing).

dwrobertstoday at 2:36 PM

I think the usage of solved is silly. Things get automated, they basically never get ‘solved’.

Will all these things get automation? Yeah sure. But the idea that they will be perfect automated solutions applicable in all cases is just marketing, it’s not reality.

testaccount121today at 2:38 PM

..

show 1 reply
claudesloptoday at 3:18 PM

> Fable and Astra can one-shot video games with compelling novel game loops. They can do systems programming, distributed systems, robotics. I haven't found a weak point.

Warning: A Fuckin Liar Was Detected

die

_s_a_m_today at 2:38 PM

God, why are you so stupid.

show 1 reply