upvote
Nowadays training relies heavily on reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR), which assesses a model's output according to objective automated checks, not subjective human judgments.
reply
.1 percentile will still be working.
reply
Human knowledge races up to the frontier through formal education and then nudges past the frontier a little bit at a time and AI will train on AI outputs that do the same. But, it will do it 1000x faster than humans because that's just how they work.
reply
>1000x faster than humans

Some of the process of expanding the frontier is not parallelizable and is built on top of previous discoveries. And pushing the frontier requires doing things in the real world, or running experiments that take significant real world time that can hurt your 1000x faster claim.

reply
sorry, while I'm no proponent of AI... you cant make this claim with anything more than "feels"

how can you be so sure that AI cant improve to a level where it has original thoughts, Creativity and imagination.

remember that our input is limited to our sensor capability. AI has an unlimited ability to add more sensors and as a consequence collect input that we are not aware of, then whats stopping it training on information we dont have access to?

you cant. no one can. we haven't maxed out this technology or the amount of compute we can throw at it yet. (we may have maxed out the economic viability of it though... I think we'll find out in the next 12-18 months.)

reply
deleted
reply
what a dumb thing to keep repeating at this point
reply
Why?
reply
Because all the models train on synthetic data too, plus they can collect their own data with robots.
reply
Synthetic data can only help the model to capture existing patterns in the current training data more efficiently. So it can improve the performance upto certain point, but not beyond it.

>they can collect their own data with robots...

This is still sci-fi.

reply
[dead]
reply
Just ignoring all the recently solved math problems human, huh?
reply
If you understood how they were solved, you'd see that you're only bolstering the point you were responding to.
reply