@YourNetworkIsHaunted@awful.systems
Post #3395117
2026-06-25 01:24 UTC
It’s also funny to note that at least 2/5 of the points are actively bad advice. Naively extrapolating from a trend line is one of the most common errors people make when trying to make a prediction, especially when you’re already prone to letting the aesthetic of data lead you astray. Trusting in a kind of “normalcy bias” or whatever you want to call the assumption that the world will continue to be pretty normal is one of the better ways to hedge against that.
Also I’ve said it before but the name “technological singularity” literally comes from the idea that at the hypothetical rate of change they’re posting all our existing models of what is possible or probable break down like the laws of physics at the center of a black hole. If you’re reasoning from a pre-singularity model then definitionally there is no expectation that it should continue to hold true. I don’t think I need to get too deep into why the whole singularitarian concept is pretty sketchy in its own right, but since it still lies at the heart of the science fiction driving these people’s predictions I think its worth acknowledging that it does suggest its own nonsense.
Replies (1)
-
@CinnasVerses@awful.systems 2026-06-25 16:14
And these people know that crypto and GameStop and their friends’ startups did not keep growing rapidly forever. They know that just because donations to EA had been rapidly growing they did not continue to accelerate. They have friends who covered the logistic function / sigmoid at Stanford. Another Californian had a witticism about the trouble getting someone to understand something when he is paid to misunderstand.