skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Let me go against some skeptics and explain why I think full o3 is pretty much AGI or at least embodies most essential aspects of AGI.

What has been lacking so far in frontier LLMs is the ability to reliably deal with the right level of abstraction for a given problem. Reasoning is useful but often comes out lacking if one cannot reason at the right level of abstraction. (Note that many humans can't either when they deal with unfamiliar domains, although that is not the case with these models.)

ARC has been challenging precisely because solving its problems often requires:

1) using multiple different *kinds* of core knowledge [1], such as symmetry, counting, color, AND

2) using the right level(s) of abstraction

Achieving human-level performance in the ARC benchmark, as well as top human performance in GPQA, Codeforces, AIME, and Frontier Math suggests the model can potentially solve any problem at the human level if it possesses essential knowledge about it. Yes, this includes out-of-distribution problems that most humans can solve.

It might not yet be able to generate highly novel theories, frameworks, or artifacts to the degree that Einstein, Grothendieck, or van Gogh could. But not many humans can either.

[1] https://www.harvardlds.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Spelke...

ADDED:

Thanks to the link to Chollet's posts by lswainemoore below. I've analyzed some easy problems that o3 failed at. They involve spatial intelligence, including connection and movement. This skill is very hard to learn from textual and still image data.

I believe this sort of core knowledge is learnable through movement and interaction data in a simulated world and it will not present a very difficult barrier to cross. (OpenAI purchased a company behind a Minecraft clone a while ago. I've wondered if this is the purpose.)
My point here is that your above idea of "proper window management" (or "window management [full stop]") is your own personal opinion.

There are differing schools of thought in how computers should be interacted with, and your opinion is one of the many opinions that exist.
It's not just an exercise, there is a 10,000 year plus nuclear waste storage facility being built in Finland set to be operational in a couple of years, there's the book written about it, Deep Time Reckoning and if one doesn't want to read a book, here's a short podcast episode about it. https://loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=21-P13-00030&s...
It’s so insignificant that at best we might delay the climate catastrophe by a few seconds
Show HN: Model Validation Using LLMs
I've seen this figure on a few tech news websites and reddit but can't find an official source. If it was in the video I must have missed it, where is this coming from?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Nutt#%22Equasy%22
Exactly and literally; from the roots of "de"="off" and "caedere"="to cut" [0]

If you can't cut something off, you cannot decide.

decision (n.)

mid-15c., decisioun, "act of deciding," from Old French décision (14c.), from Latin decisionem (nominative decisio) "a decision, settlement, agreement," noun of action from past-participle stem of decidere "to decide, determine," literally "to cut off," from de "off" (see de-) + caedere "to cut" (from PIE root *kae-id- "to strike").

[0] https://www.etymonline.com/word/decision
I’m getting a 404 error for the FAQ link in the footer. It seems like this is similar to FreeTube [1] (which is YouTube only though, whereas Grayjay supports multiple platforms). Does Grayjay allow downloading videos (and if yes, does it also allow choosing the quality/format)?

[1]: https://github.com/FreeTubeApp/FreeTube
This was an enjoyable read

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/10vfgiq/what...
I don't think so. The authors recommended stopping using these utensils based on their faulty risk analysis, and all of the media coverage repeated that. Even after the correction, the authors are still pushing their conclusion.
> because it would allow moving people more cost-effectively (among other things)

Add last-mile and model for the real American population distribution. Not an imagined America where everyone lives on Manhattan.

Not all miles travelled are equal. In value, urgency or desirability and thus price willing to be paid. Complaining about self driving cars is asinine. The scales are wrong. The problems are wrong. The places are wrong.

> nothing in this discussion is even remotely new for transit advocates like myself

I mean, exactly. We’re urbanising without commensurate increases in public transit. Deployment or use. Perhaps that hints at a change being in order.
There is a big gap in the greater security landscape here. I personally use hardware authenticators for this reason, but I have to manually enrol each security key for each account.

Really what I would like is a root of trust which maybe is a cipher text which I can store in several physical locations, and then my security keys are derived from that root of trust. Then when I set up 2fa with a service it is using the root of trust and seeing that my security keys are is derived from that root of trust. This allows me to register the root of trust only once and then I can use any key derived from it.
An algorithm is “a process or set of rules to be followed in calculations or other problem-solving operations, especially by a computer”

How does a giant pile of linear algebra not meet that definition?
I'm not sure it'd help what they are talking about much.

E.g. go back in time and imagine you didn't know there are ways for computers to be really good at performing integration yet as nobody had tried to make them. If someone asked you how to tell if something is intelligent "the ability to easily reason integrations or calculate extremely large multiplications in mathematics" might seem like a great test to make.

Skip forward to the modern era and it's blatantly obvious CASes like Mathematica on a modern computer range between "ridiculously better than the average person" to "impossibly better than the best person" depending on the test. At the same time, it becomes painfully obvious a CAS is wholly unrelated to general intelligence and just because your test might have been solvable by an AGI doesn't mean solving it proves something must have been an AGI.

So you come up with a new test... but you have the same problem as originally, it seems like anything non-human completely bombs and an AGI would do well... but how do you know the thing that solves it will have been an AGI for sure and not just another system clearly unrelated?

Short of a more clever way what GP is saying is the goalposts must keep being moved until it's not so obvious the thing isn't AGI, not that the average human gets a certain score which is worse.

.

All that aside, to answer your original question, in the presentation it was said the average human gets 85% and this was the first model to beat that. It was also said a second version is being worked on. They have some papers on their site about clear examples of why the current test clearly has a lot of testing unrelated to whether something is really AGI (a brute force method was shown to get >50% in 2020) so their aim is to create a new goalpost test and see how things shake out this time.
almost none. its time to implement anonymous online id systems.
Your comment reminds me of this quote from a book published in the 80s:

> There is a related “Theorem” about progress in AI: once some mental function is programmed, people soon cease to consider it as an essential ingredient of “real thinking”. The ineluctable core of intelligence is always in that next thing which hasn’t yet been programmed. This “Theorem” was first proposed to me by Larry Tesler, so I call it Tesler’s Theorem: “AI is whatever hasn’t been done yet.”
The regular 9-to-5 is seen as a last resort now—it’s almost like you’ve failed if you don’t have a side hustle. That’s the vibe. With AI and machine learning platforms making waves, especially for traders, the game has completely changed. The barrier to entry? Practically gone. These platforms have made it so easy to get started that anyone with a bit of curiosity can jump in.

It’s not the exclusive playground of the Wall Street elite anymore. What used to be this tightly guarded world of algorithms and insider knowledge is now available to anyone willing to dive in. People are out here making bank, and they’re getting good at it. Trading isn’t just something “some people” do—it’s turning into a thriving industry where regular folks are learning the ropes and doing well for themselves.

This whole shift has made the traditional career path feel outdated. Why settle for clocking in and out when you can leverage tools and tech to build something for yourself? The idea of just sticking to the 9-to-5 feels like giving up when the opportunities to create and grow are right there, waiting.
What exactly is human (or animal) intelligence? How do you define that?
https://archive.is/dNkJj
Maybe the attackers already knew through some other means that they had large crypto holdings, i.e., spear phishing.
Depends on the time frame and the ATMs being used.

I don't think all ATMs require chipped cards yet, and its still common to have a debit card issued with a magstripe. If the GP used their debit card to pay for things it could have easily been duped. My bank issued me a new card for an account a few years ago; it still has a magstripe and I assume can still be used at magstripe-only ATMs.

If it was even a few years ago, a lot of ATMs would have still worked with just a stripe. It's a bit more difficult to find these days, but old ATMs still running OS/2 WARP are still around and kicking.

Its frustrating so many banks and what not are still issuing cards with magstripes. These days wipe the cards I use most with a magnet to try and mess up the magstripe. I don't want to ever use it. Generally speaking, if they can't take chipped cards, tap to pay, or cash I'm not doing business with them.
FCC National Broadband Map: Mobile
> you can have meaningless sex in a committed relationship and meaningful sex in a non-committed one

no, I don't think this is true. The older I get the more I think there's real wisdom in being very careful about who you have sex with.

It will have meaning, whether you want it to or not, and it will be negative meaning like regret if you are not very careful.

Sex is extremely dangerous and it is only safe to engage in it with someone you know well and trust, and trust isn't to be given lightly. You will be at your most vulnerable with your partner, both during the act and potentially afterwards due to the hormonal effects and emotional effects as well as the potential physical consequences. "Safe sex" is a lie.

I don't think in the age of birth control that everyone needs to wait until marriage but we have gone very far in the other direction and I really wish someone had told me when I was younger that I would remember all of my partners in vivid detail, especially the ones I wish I could forget.

No, there is really no such thing as meaningless sex.
CFPB sues Chase, BofA, and Wells Fargo for allowing fraud to fester on Zelle
You watch 2-3 videos on autopilot and Joe Rogan always pops up eventually. With that kind of promotion I dont understand why he's not bigger.
It was in the video. I don't know if Open ai have a page up yet
I've had a similar experience in a long running survey. When I gave the "wrong" answers, the interviewer asked a bunch of questions and eventually told me to skip certain questions.
Which parts of reasoning do you think is missing? I do feel like it covers a lot of 'reasoning' ground despite its on the surface simplicity
> For my part, I'm grateful for Spotify's "exclude from taste profile" feature

This is my first time being made aware of this. Fantastic option that more websites should adopt
On the flip side, has anyone ever quite a job via email or text?
What is this app? Avast blocks the site as malware. False positive?

"This URL contains malicious code that could harm your computer.
If you’re willing to risk it, you can turn off your Avast Web Shield to continue.
But we strongly recommend walking away from this one."
Yes that's why it is "semi"-private: From the ARC website "This set is "semi-private" because we can assume that over time, this data will be added to LLM training data and need to be periodically updated."

I presume evaluation on the test set is gated (you have to ask ARC to run it).
There are things Chimps do easily that humans fail at, and vice/versa of course.

There are blind spots, doesn't take away from 'general'.
Gaming the benchmarks usually needs to be considered first when evaluating new results.
again, you're only looking far back enough in history to solidify your own point. look back further - where did these "proud jihadists" and "evildoers" come from? the implication here is that there is no precipitating historical events for the current day situation - the hate came from nowhere and they have so much of it that it's ingrained in their DNA. if you believe that, i suppose it's simple to justify extermination of children.

> One thing's for sure, the number of Palestinian casualties is the biggest tragedy and they should have stopped shooting way before it got this far.

again - "if only the victims would stop resisting, then we could have peace."

> And everybody can recognize that the number of killers in the IDF has skyrocketed over the last year, but can anybody be sure when this matches or exceeds the number of Palestinians who are fully dedicated to killing Israelis?

how does someone engage with this question? here's my attempt: "everyone can recognize that there's a lot of violence on both sides, but how can we be sure that the IDF isn't actually doing this because they're super duper evil?"
> most of the people training these next-gen AIs are neurodiverse and we are training the AI in our own image

Do you have any evidence to support that? It would be fascinating if the field is primarly advancing due to a unique constellation of traits contributed by individuals who, in the past, may not have collaborated so effectively.
When none of us have jobs or income, there will be no ability for us to buy products. And then no reason for companies to buy ads to sell products to people who don’t have money. Without ad money (or the potential of future ad money), the people pushing the bounds of AGI into work replacement will lose the very income streams powering this research and their valuations.

Ford didn’t support a 40 hour work week out of the kindness of his heart. He wanted his workers to have time off for buying things (like his cars).

I wonder if our AGI industrialist overlords will do something similar for revenue sharing or UBI.
Obvious archive link: https://archive.is/jmaXN
It did have cultural impact though and the impending attempt to outsource the army for greencards very much reminds of the germanic legions of the roman army.
> They don’t need the same parking infrastructure we have now.

The existing parking infrastructure is not going away because of self-driving cars. The exact same argument could've been applied to the car sharing programs that already exist. People that own cars are not going to leave their cars for a robo-taxi, in the same way that they are not getting rid of their cars in favor of a ZipCar membership.

> Buses also need a place to park and get maintenance

Do you know that picture showing people standing on the street to show the density of the different methods of transportation? What do you think needs a larger parking footprint? I'd guess that even if autonomous cars got to a remarkable 10% idle rate, they would still require more space than buses.

> Self-driving allows locating the parking in more distant locations.

Guess what companies will do when they realize that their customers do not want to wait 10 minutes for their ride to come pick them up at home? That's right, they will get lots of parking spots close to the urban/suburban city centers.
This is one advantage of a system with a constrained set of commands/grammars, as opposed to the Alexa/Siri model of trying to process all arbitrary text while in active mode. It can simply ignore/discard any invocations which don't match those specific grammars (and no need to wait to confirm that the device is awake).

"Computer, turn lights to 50%" -> "turn lights to fifty percent" -> {action: "lights", value: 50}

"My new computer has a really beefy graphics card" -> "has a really beefy graphics card" -> {action: null}
> I block the videos and the channels from recommendations but they keep coming

Part of this is channels opening side or mirror channels that they upload their videos to as well (since you'll sometimes see the exact same video but no ContentID strike) so they can get around people doing that.
> Add a meteor impact or a nuclear war

If either of those happens, radioactive waste will be the least of anyone's worries.
And look at the airplanes, they really can’t just land on a mountain slope or a tree without heavy maintenance afterwards. Those people weren’t all stupid, they questioned the promise of flying servicemen delivering mail or milk to their window and flying on a personal aircar to their workplace. Just like todays promises about whatever the CEOs telltales are. Imagining bullshit isn’t unique to this century.

Aerospace is still a highly regulated area that requires training and responsibility. If parallels can be drawn here, they don’t look so cool for a regular guy.
> and nobody is setting <font> color attributes in a loop.

You would be surprised! For instance, MotionMark, one of the main web benchmarks, keeps mutating CSS colors directly on (thousands of) elements to animate them, every frame.
But the Bakersfield/Merced HSR line is an actual project, estimated at over $30B (it makes no sense independently but is part of LA-to-SF).

You seem to be comparing an actual, private tech project to what you wished public transit looked like, not what it actually looks like.

Public transit is awesome, but construction costs in the anglophone world are bananas (https://transitcosts.com/).
Oh cool, it's like RSS consumption for video content (I think). I worry that since it isn't using blessed APIs it would get shut down by the platforms if it gets much traction. Also "trust me instead of them" can be a tough sell to the privacy-focused crowd. I'd love something that makes it trivial effort for the creators to directly publish on more open platforms--more like RSS publishing for video content. But youtube gives you discovery and a cut in the ad revenue, so I'm not sure how to get the incentives to align...
Somewhat ironic trusting malware to tell you what's malware and what's not
Key Fed inflation measure shows 2.4% rate in November, lower than expected
Another meaningless benchmark, another month—it’s like clockwork at this point. No one’s going to remember this in a month; it’s just noise. The real test? It’s not in these flashy metrics or minor improvements. The only thing that actually matters is how fast it can wipe out the layers of middle management and all those pointless, bureaucratic jobs that add zero value.

That’s the true litmus test. Everything else? It’s just fine-tuning weights, playing around the edges. Until it starts cutting through the fat and reshaping how organizations really operate, all of this is just more of the same.
Increased retail theft increases the risk of employee confrontation or employee directed violence.

Increased risk is not the same as increased occurrences (but it wouldn't be surprising for them to both increase.)

Liability wise you still want to respond to the risk.
I'm glad these stats show a better estimate of human ability than just the average mturker. The graph here has the average mturker performance as well as a STEM grad measurement. Stuff like that is why we're always feeling weird that these things supposedly outperform humans while still sucking. I'm glad to see 'human performance' benchmarked with more variety (attention, time, education, etc).
Indeed, import/export is one of the most important design point centering control back to the user, and even better is abstracted storage of data: if I had a single OPML file accessible from everywhere (with auth, of course) and all tools took the universally accessible path, I could change feeds in one tool and automatically see the result in another without fussing out import/export buttons and procedures.
This is just as silly as claiming that people "moved the goalposts" when a computer beat Kasparov at chess to claim that it wasn't AGI: it wasn't a good test and some people only realize this after the computer beat Kasparov but couldn't do much else. In this case the ARC maintainers specifically have stated that this is a necessary but not sufficient test of AGI (I personally think it is neither).
Between skeptics and adherents who is more easily able to extract VC money for vaporware? If you limit yourself to 'the facts' you're leaving tons of $$ on the table...
It sucks that I would love to be excited about this... but I mostly feel anxiety and sadness.
It's not made of "steps", it's an almost continuous function to its inputs. And a function is not an algorithm: it is not an object made of conditions, jumps, terminations, ... Obviously it has computation capabilities and is Turing-complete, but is the opposite of an algorithm.
I’m excited. Are we ever going to see an iOS version?
Efficiency is now key.

~=$3400 per single task to meet human performance on this benchmark is a lot. Also it shows the bullets as "ARC-AGI-TUNED", which makes me think they did some undisclosed amount of fine-tuning (eg. via the API they showed off last week), so even more compute went into this task.

We can compare this roughly to a human doing ARC-AGI puzzles, where a human will take (high variance in my subjective experience) between 5 second and 5 minutes to solve the task.
(So i'd argue a human is at 0.03USD - 1.67USD per puzzle at 20USD/hr, and they include in their document an average mechancal turker at $2 USD task in their document)

Going the other direction: I am interpreting this result as human level reasoning now costs (approximately) 41k/hr to 2.5M/hr with current compute.

Super exciting that OpenAI pushed the compute out this far so we could see he O-series scaling continue and intersect humans on ARC, now we get to work towards making this economical!
Not to necessarily defend the study here, but I don't think that's a good reason to dismiss the study out of hand. Words themselves, the actual sounds independent of their technical meaning, still have very strong, deep-rooted associations that are hard to fight even if you've been educated. The subtext and day-to-day use of "intelligence" and "problem solving skill" are different, and color the way you think of them even if you know they're technically synonymous (which, do note, they're not quite). That association operates at the same deep level at which the supposed effect works.
It is not a new discovery that Python is terrible for packaging and distribution. Unfortunately, very little has been done about this. The fact that Python is used on particular environments controlled by the developers, mainly machine learning, makes this even more difficult to fix.
"it will take over the world"

Calibrating to the current hype cycle has been challenging with AI pronouncements.
that's going to work when every white collar worker goes into the trades /s

who is going to pay for residential electrical work lol and how much will you make if some guy from MIT is going to compete with you
> We’ve seemingly hit a ceiling on the base LLM forward-pass capability so any further wins are going to be in how we juggle multiple inferences to solve the problem space

Not so sure - but we might need to figure out the inference/search/evaluation strategy in order to provide the data we need to distill to the single forward-pass data fitting.