Sergey Brin says AGI is within reach if Googlers work 60-hour weeks
https://arstechnica.com/google/2025/02/sergey-brin-says-agi-is-within-reach-if-googlers-work-60-hour-weeks/Open linkView original on sopuli.xyz444
Comments190https://arstechnica.com/google/2025/02/sergey-brin-says-agi-is-within-reach-if-googlers-work-60-hour-weeks/Open linkView original on sopuli.xyz
That's why I bake my cake at 2608°C for ~1,8 minutes, it just works™
Or!—hear me out—one woman whose 8 co-gestators were just laid off by someone who doesn’t understand what their job was
And an eager young bride can do in 7 months what takes 9 for cows and countesses.
Burnt crust full of liquid cake. yum!
Cake brulee
It's more accurate than you think, because brulée literally means burnt
You can’t produce a baby in one month by getting nine women pregnant.
AGI is not in reach. We need to stop this incessant parroting from tech companies. LLMs are stochastic parrots. They guess the next word. There's no thought or reasoning. They don't understand inputs. They mimic human speech. They're not presenting anything meaningful.
I feel like I have found a lone voice of sanity in a jungle of brainless fanpeople sucking up the snake oil and pretending LLMs are AI. A simple control loop is closer to AI than a stochastic parrot, as you correctly put it.
There are at least three of us.
I am worried what happens when the bubble finally pops because shit always rolls downhill and most of us are at the bottom of the hill.
Not sure if we need that particular bubble to pop for us to be drowned in a sea of shit, looking at the state of the world right now :( But silicon valley seems to be at the core of this clusterfuck, as if all the villains form there or flock there...
LLMs are AI. There’s a common misconception about what ‘AI’ actually means. Many people equate AI with the advanced, human-like intelligence depicted in sci-fi - like HAL 9000, JARVIS, Ava, Mother, Samantha, Skynet, and GERTY. These systems represent a type of AI called AGI (Artificial General Intelligence), designed to perform a wide range of tasks and demonstrate a form of general intelligence similar to humans.
However, AI itself doesn't imply general intelligence. Even something as simple as a chess-playing robot qualifies as AI. Although it’s a narrow AI, excelling in just one task, it still fits within the AI category. So, AI is a very broad term that covers everything from highly specialized systems to the type of advanced, adaptable intelligence that we often imagine. Think of it like the term ‘plants,’ which includes everything from grass to towering redwoods - each different, but all fitting within the same category.
If a basic chess engine is AI then bubble sort is too
It's not. Bubble sort is a purely deterministic algorithm with no learning or intelligence involved.
Many chess engines run on deterministic algos as well
Bubble sort is just a basic set of steps for sorting numbers - it doesn’t make choices or adapt. A chess engine, on the other hand, looks at different possible moves, evaluates which one is best, and adjusts based on the opponent’s play. It actively searches through options and makes decisions, while bubble sort just follows the same repetitive process no matter what. That’s a huge difference.
Your argument can be reduced to saying that if the algorithm is comprised of many steps, it is AI, and if not, it isn't.
A chess engine decides nothing. It understands nothing. It's just an algorithm.
Here we go... Fanperson explaining the world to the dumb lost sheep. Thank you so much for stepping down from your high horse to try and educate a simple person. /s
How's insulting the people respectfully disagreeing with you working out so far? That ad-hominem was completely uncalled for.
"Fanperson" is an insult now? Cry me a river, snowflake. Also, you weren't disagreeing, you were explaining something to someone perceived less knowledgeable than you, while demonstrating you have no grasp of the core difference between stochastics and AI.
That undersells them slightly.
LLMs are powerful tools for generating text that looks like something. Need something rephrased in a different style? They're good at that. Need something summarized? They can do that, too. Need a question answered? No can do.
LLMs can't generate answers to questions. They can only generate text that looks like answers to questions. Often enough that answer is even correct, though usually suboptimal. But they'll also happily generate complete bullshit answers and to them there's no difference to a real answer.
They're text transformers marketed as general problem solvers because a) the market for text transformers isn't that big and b) general problem solvers is what AI researchers are always trying to create. They have their use cases but certainly not ones worth the kind of spending they get.
LLM's can now generate answers. Watch this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPf5GCQBNn4&t=450s
You missed the part where deep seek uses a separate inference engine to take the LLM output and reason through it to see if it makes sense.
No it's not perfect. But it isn't just predicting text like how AI was a couple of years ago.
My favourite way to liken LLMs to something else is to autocorrect, it just guesses, and it gets stuff wrong, and it is constantly being retrained to recognise your preferences, such as it starting to not correct fuck to duck for instance.
And it's funny and sad how some people think these LLMs are their friends, like no, it's a collosally sized autocorrect system that you cannot comprehend, it has no consciousness, it lacks any thought, it just predicts from a prompt using numerical weights and a neural network.
Why is AGI not in reach? What insight do you have on the matter than you can so confidently make an absolute statement like that?
Experts in the field.
https://open.spotify.com/episode/4IoS9rBDq7GLwsgccKqCti?si=cQn1SmoJRaSb-9a-6doaBQ
I also work in the industry. In particular I work in data analytics consulting. It’s all hype to sell consulting hours and compute.
Then please explain your reasoning. Statements alone are meaningless if you're unable to back them up with explanations.
I promise this is relevant and worth the watch.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tBE06SdgzwM&t=3s
lol, because if they work 40-hour weeks they might create it a couple of weeks later
Or, worse, they might actually have to hire enough people to actually do the job. Why hire 100 people with good work life balance, when you can hire 60 people that aren't allowed to have lives or families.
I mean, that's what the AI will be for...
Yeah, suddenly they'll go from 60 hour work weeks to 0 if the AI proponents are to be believed (which you shouldn't).
For real -- ultimately it's the dream of every billionaire to have a servile AI at their beck and call, while the rest of us can eat rocks and roam the wasteland fighting over gasoline.
Exactly that's where it should be doubled down... if their own estimates are correct... it's only a 6 month expense. If they really believe they are about to open the key to basically eliminating the cost of millions of workers indefinately, wouldn't throwing thousands of workers to accomplish it faster, lead to cost savings.
Say if I wanted a machine that could make eggs indefinately forever... but to make it I had to put 100 eggs into it. why would I put one egg in a day for 8 months, instead of buying 100 eggs today.
"Work 50% longer weeks so you can make something that'll both make me richer AND cost you your jobs!" is not the motivational speech he thinks it is.
I don't even know what AGI is, and I read the headline as "rich disconnected from reality asshole".
Turns out I was right.
A General ignoramus
Wait, are these AI boosters bragging about how close they are to building God the torture that Roko's Basilisk is inflicting on us all?
To be fair, you're only going to be tortured if you don't help out like good old Sergey here.
If it can be reached in 60 hour work weeks it can be reached in 40, but nah mfs should rush to get themselves replaced
If it can be reached in 60 hour work weeks, then it can be reached in 40 hour work weeks be hiring a second person.
If management isn't willing to put the effort in of hiring the required staff, why would I want to work the job of 2 people for 1 persons pay?
IT project management doesn't work that way, but it doesn't matter much. 60 hour work weeks wouldn't help, either.
If it's within reach of a 60 hour week then it's within reach of a 30 hour week.
This LLM copycat bullshit is never going to be it though. It's not thinking, it's looking up the answers at the back of the book.
Is there any actual evidence that they are getting closer to AGI? It seems ridiculous to think that this LLM parrot bullshit is getting there, when the thing can't even learn the rules of a basic sum.
Yup, hire 20-30% more people and have them work 30 hours. That's fewer total hours worked, but they're higher quality hours, so you should get more from less.
Can 9 women conceive and give birth to a child in one month?
lol no way AGI is within reach. He is just trying to hype investors. Bet he has a scheduled stock sale soon.
The classic pump and dump scheme with some extra steps to make it more legal.
Google "Trust us bro, AGI is right around the corner."
Just for information: We know, from multiple studies, that working more than 40 hours a week for longer periods of time is extremly unhealthy for you. A week has 24*7 = 168 hours and you should sleep 8 hours. That are 56 hours and if you're working 60 hours, that leaves you with 52 hours or 7,5 hours per day for stuff like "commuting to work", "buying groceries", "brushing your teeth" , "family", "friends", "sport" or "this important appointment at the dentist".
And that 7,5 hours are without a weekend. This will kill you. You might be younger and feel strong, but this will kill you.
Not to mention that it doesn't yield higher output. So it's stupid on every level.
7,5h per day is an absolute maximum for a standard workday. Crunches are sometimes fine if there's a good reason, but they probably need to be followed by extended rest.
Yeah, that is also a factor. You can't expect good work from somebody who has been working for 60 hours for years without having a vacation.
And if you want to have two weekends, 60 hours in 5 days is 12 hours of work a day, minus 8 hours for sleep you get 4 hours, minus ~2 hours commute you get 2 hours, and the rest is basic cooking and eating. This leaves 0 hours for anything else, including rest or even any other duties that you'll end up resolving throughout the weekends. This will absolutely kill you in the long run.
I remember hearing about somewhere - alphabet or meta or something like that - that basically provided adult crèche facilities for the employees. Way beyond just food - On-site nap rooms. Washing machines. Showers. The works. All to enable just a super unhealthy attitude towards work. Thinking about how much that must've affected anyone going there straight after uni when they should have been leaning how to look after themselves makes me shudder with cringe
The plantations are quite comfortable these days....
"Man who works 10 hours per year tells underlings to work 60 hours per week."
This is almost too depressing to be funny.
globally
Thought this was an Onion article!
Hey plebs! I demand you work 50% more to develop AGI so that I can replace you with robots and fire all of you and make myself a double plus plutocrat! Also, I want to buy an island, small city, Bunker, Spaceship, And/Or something.
I’m really getting sick and tired of these rich fuckers saying shit like this.
we are no where close to AGI given this current technology.
working 50% longer is not going to make a bit of difference for AGI
and even if it would matter, hire 50% more people
The only thing this is going to accomplish is likely make him wealthier. So fuck him.
Increasing working hours decreases actual labor done per hour. A person working 40 hours per week will more often than not achieve more than someone working 70.
"in Britain during the First World War, there had been a munitions factory that made people work seven days a week. When they cut back to six days, they found, the factory produced more overall."
"In 1920s Britain, W. G. Kellogg—the manufacturer of cereals—cut his staff from an eight-hour day to a six-hour day, and workplace accidents (a good measure of attention) fell by 41 percent. In 2019 in Japan, Microsoft moved to a four-day week, and they reported a 40 percent improvement in productivity. In Gothenberg in Sweden around the same time, a care home for elderly people went from an eight-hour day to a six-hour day with no loss of pay, and as a result, their workers slept more, experienced less stress, and took less time off sick. In the same city, Toyota cut two hours per day off the workweek, and it turned out their mechanics produced 114 percent of what they had before, and profits went up by 25 percent. All this suggests that when people work less, their focus significantly improves. Andrew told me we have to take on the logic that more work is always better work. “There’s a time for work, and there’s a time for not having work,” he said, but today, for most people, “the problem is that we don’t have time. Time, and reflection, and a bit of rest to help us make better decisions. So, just by creating that opportunity, the quality of what I do, of what the staff does, improves.”"
In 1920s Britain, W. G. Kellogg: A. Coote et al., The Case for a Four Day Week (London: Polity, 2021), 6.
In 2019 in Japan, Microsoft moved to a four-day week: K. Paul, “Microsoft Japan Tested a Four-Day Work Week and Productivity Jumped by 40%,” Guardian, November 4, 2019; and Coote et al., Case for a Four Day Week, 89.
In Gothenberg in Sweden around the same time: Coote et al., Case for a Four Day Week, 68–71.
In the same city, Toyota cut two hours per: day: Ibid., 17–18.
The real point of increasing working hours is to make your job consume your life.
Imagine how much productivity we'd have if we cut work to 0 hours per week
Or option 4) stay as you are and you will just acheive it in due time rather than in a 50% shorter timeframe?
Edit: 25% shorter? I dont know, maths isnt my strong suit and im drunk.
relative to where we were before LLMs, I think we're quite close
They are very impressive to where we were 20 years ago, hell even 5 years ago. The first time I played with ChatGPT I was absolutely floored. But after playing with a lot of them, even training a few RAGs (Retrieval-Augmented Generation), we aren’t really that close and in my opinion this is not a useful path towards a true AGI. Don’t get me wrong, this tool is extremely useful and to most people, they’d likely pass a basic Turing Test. But LLMs are sophisticated pattern recognition systems trained on vast amounts of text data that predict the most likely next word or token in a sequence. That’s really all they do. They are really good at predicting the next word. While they demonstrate impressive language capabilities, they lack several fundamental components necessary for an AGI: -no true understanding -they can’t really engage in the real world. -they have no real ability to learn real-time. -they don’t really have the ability to take in more then one type of info at a time.
I mean the simplest way in my opinion to explain the difference is you will never have an LLM just come up with something on its own. It’s always just a response to a prompt.
Sorry for the late reply - work is consuming everything :)
I suspect that we are (like LLMs) mostly "sophisticated pattern recognition systems trained on vast amounts of data."
Considering the claim that LLMs have "no true understanding", I think there isn't a definition of "true understanding" that would cleanly separate humans and LLMs. It seems clear that LLMs are able to extract the information contained within language, and use that information to answer questions and inform decisions (with adequately tooled agents). I think that acquiring and using information is what's relevant, and that's solved.
Engaging with the real world is mostly a matter of tooling. Real-time learning and more comprehensive multi-modal architectures are just iterations on current systems.
I think it's quite relevant that the Turing Test has essentially been passed by machines. It's our instinct to gatekeep intellect, moving the goalposts as they're passed in order to affirm our relevance and worth, but LLMs have our intellectual essence, and will continue to improve rapidly while we stagnate.
There is still progress to be made before we're obsolete, but I think it will be just a few years, and then it's just a question of cost efficiency.
Anyways, we'll see! Thanks for the thoughtful reply
What if they just work 30 hour weeks for twice as many weeks?
More like 10-20% more weeks. It turns out people get less productive the more hours they work.
I've noticed my peak efficiency is at about 32h/week
It also greatly improves my mood and capacity for hobbies after work. I will never in my life work more than that if I can help it
If you need 50% more person-hours, hire 50% more people.
Instructions unclear, fired 50% of people
Let's work 20 hour weeks then. Who wants AGI other than war pigs and billionaires?
I mean, we could get a rogue agi take over the world. It might not even be worse lmao
WarPigs by Sabbath was about the future.
Every single person suffering from a chronic / terminal illnes for example. If a problem can be solved, then AGI can solve it.
That would be nice but would the corporate medical induatry allow that?
Or just hire 50% more engineers? Or wait 50% longer?
with "hire more" you do run up against the "9 women can have a baby in 1 month" limit, but in this case it's likely to help.
Why?
If it's in reach working 60 hour weeks, it's also in reach working 40 hour weeks, it will just take 1/3rd longer. ;)
Let's be real, it'll probably happen faster on 40 hour work weeks than 60.
lots of evidence starting to point to it'd be quicker in 32 hour weeks than 40
50%
Yup... Work your ass off guys, so we can fire you sooner! Great deal.
I bet Sergey Brin doesn't even work half that.
Oh he'll tell you he works 16 hours a day. Of course his meal, his exercise, his reading of the news, his coffee, all are work.
But he works 16 hours a day!
Or you could hire 50% more employees for the holy grail of having more wealth than any other company ever after this program.
But even for something this big (that, incidentally will end humanity) they are too scrooge to even pay their employees a normal wage for normal hours
Fuck these assholes, burn in hell
It is also absolutely 100% BS investor-bait. At this point it should be obvious that we have reached just about the peak of what LLMs can do. And it’s notably not Google’s Gemini even - other models are generally better. For AGI to be feasible, there should be a paradigm shift, which is not a function of more work hours.
Or if you hire more personnel. Overtime work is more expensive anyway.
Btw, the overwhelmingly positive field study in the UK over the 4-day week...
no no, he means free overtime. Like a reverse "20% policy"
"We only pay for four days and you work the remaining on your free time."
In the US, salaried engineers are exempt from overtime pay regulations. He is telling them to work 20 extra hours, with no extra pay.
Vs. 1 day less work with the same pay being more productive. But it's not about work-live-balance or productivity.
We can make the AI slave, we just need the humans to be more slave-like to do it.
Then we can enslave humanity with the AI slave
Well that's the neat thing, the owners of the AI won't need humanity. They will exterminate us using the AI and sit smugly on their thrones of skulls until they expire or kill each other. Then I guess AI can just do its own thing in our ruins.
So this is how you use AI to get these promised productivity gains.
AGI requires a few key components that no LLM is even close to.
First, it must be able to discern truth based on evidence, rather than guessing it. Can’t just throw more data at it, especially with the garbage being pumped out these days.
Second, it must ask questions in the pursuit of knowledge, especially when truth is ambiguous. Once that knowledge is found, it needs to improve itself, pruning outdated and erroneous information.
Third, it would need free will. And that’s the one it will never get, I hope. Free will is a necessary part of intelligent consciousness. I know there are some who argue it does not exist but they’re wrong.
The human mind isn't infinitely complex. Consciousness has to be a tractable problem imo. I watched Westworld so I'm something of an expert on the matter.
I strongly disagree there. I argue that not even humans have free will, yet we're generally intelligent so I don't see why AGI would need it either. In fact, I don't even know what true free will would look like. There are only two reasons why anyone does anything: either you want to or you have to. There's obviously no freedom in having to do something but you can't choose your wants and not-wants either. You helplessly have the beliefs and preferences that you do. You didn't choose them and you can't choose to not have them either.
I want chocolate, I don't eat chocolate, exercise of free will.
By your logic no alcoholic could possibly stop drinking and become sober.
In my humble opinion, free will does not mean we are free of internal and external motivators, it means that we are free to either give in to them or go against.
Our universe is predeterministic. Block Universe (aka Eternalism).
Check mate.
It's not according to quantum physics we observe
Seemingly "random" events can still be containerized in the crystalized time structure.
There’s a reason you don’t eat chocolate - likely health concerns or fear of weight gain. Your desire to stay healthy is stronger than your desire to eat chocolate. But you can’t take credit for that any more than you can blame an alcoholic for their inability to resist drinking.
I am curious to hear why you insist it's inevitable. What intrinsic properties of the universe make you believe that we don't have any choice and all our actions are set in stone?
For me. I think everything is physical, and there's always a cause and effect. There is no magical non-physical consciousness. A combination of your genetics, experiences, and environment determine the "choices" you make/actions you take. Free will is an illusion, IMO.
Your choice of words is an analytical failure it says that the the will somehow sitting on top of all those processes rather than being a function of them.
I don't think my wording implies that the will is sitting on top of those processes, but rather that it's an emergent property of them. You're the one who's implying a false dichotomy - just because our choices might be influenced by prior causes doesn't mean we don't have agency. I'm asking what makes you think our actions are predetermined, not what makes you think we have some kind of magical free will that defies causality. Can you actually address the question I asked, rather than nitpicking my phrasing?
What is agency
If your choices are a function of prior events and an emergent property of complex but deterministic processes where does agency come in? We are a complex deterministic process that simulates our own self to both predict a much more complex unconscious self and write rules to influence it going forward.
We call this process being conscious even when its writing just so stories after the fact.
What is inevitable? At no point have I claimed that our actions are set in stone. That would imply fatalism which equally suggest that things can happen without anything causing them to happen.
Free will is what sets us apart from most other animals. I would assert that many humans rarely exert their own free will. Having an interest and pursuing it is an exercise of free will. Some people are too busy surviving to do this. Curiosity and exploration are exercises of free will. Another would be helping strangers or animals - a choice bringing the individual no advantage.
You argue that wants, preferences, and beliefs are not chosen. Where do they come from? Why does one individual have those interests and not another? It doesn’t come from your parents or genes. It doesn’t come from your environment.
It’s entirely possible to choose your interests and beliefs. People change religions and careers. People abandon hobbies and find new ones. People give away their fortunes to charity.
By free will I mean the ability to have done otherwise. This, I argue is an illusion. What ever the reason is that makes one choose A rather than B will make them choose A over and over again no matter how many times we rewind the universe and try again. What ever compelled you to make that choise remains unchanged and you'd choose the same thing every time. There's no freedom in that.
I also don't see a reason why humans would be unique in that sense. If we have free will then what leads you to believe that other animals don't? If they can live normal lives without free will, then surely we can too, right?
I don't know where our curiousity or the desire to help the less fortunate comes from. Genes and environmental factors most likely. That's why cultural differences exists too. If we all just freely chose our likes and not-likes then it's a bit odd that people living in the same country have similar preferences but the people on the other side of the world are significantly different.
Also, have you read about split brain experiments? When the corpus callosum is severed which prevents the different brain hemispheres from communicating with each other we can then with some clever tricks interview the different hemispheres separately and the finding there is that they tend to have vastly different preferences. Which hemisphere is "you"?
Free will comes from the “heart”, not the brain. It doesn’t fit in the materialistic view of science. Our bodies are quantum electric fields, and those fields interact. In my own experience I would say emotions or intentions don’t translate fully from video, but in person I can feel them.
Maybe if they add a quantum processor to the computer it can gain free will (disguised as random chance). But I think we have more to learn about the nature of consciousness before AGI is anywhere close to having free will.
And why is free will necessary for intelligence? New discoveries require curiosity. Scientific breakthroughs require new connections and discernment of truth. If the computer is doing research, it needs to decide when to stop looking, who to ask questions to, how far to dig, designing further experiments. Without free will you just have a big fancy encyclopedia.
The dangerous side of free will is manipulation, subversion, exploitation, deception, etc. So yeah I hope they don’t figure it out.
They talk about AGI like it's some kind of intrinsically benevolent messiah that is going to come along and free humanity of limitations rather than a product that is going to be monetised to make a few very rich people even richer
It's a belief in Techno-Jesus that will solve all our problems so we don't have to solve them ourselves (don't need to do the uncomfortable things we don't want to). Just like aliens, the singularity, etc.
Ironically the world is full of people who like to think about solutions to problems. But those in power won’t put them to solve those because it’s not part of the political game.
And somehow it will run on thin air
What if the whole earth, itself, is like, one giant supercomputer, designed to answer the ultimate question, and it's just been running for billions of years?
Anyone else feel hungry?
No, but lets go get some margaritas.
Slushy the rich?
Bloody Mary's are back on the menu!
When exactly was this pivotal moment when Google became a cult not a company ?
It was always kind of cult-y, but things seemed to really go downhill around the time they got dominance in the browser market to pair with their search dominance.
1998
Or, y'know, he could hire 50% more programmers / contractors, instead of overworking his current staff
There's an upper limit to how many bodies you can throw at a task.
9 women won't make a baby in one month.
But you can make an average of 1 baby a month in 9 months with 9 woman. It's all about proper planning and budgeting over longer periods.
Equivalent to ~2 wobbly adults in trenchcoats for you metric users.
That wouldn't allow him to also simultaneously pay low wages.
What if you do more with less?
He isn't even using that head anyways, seems like some cost cutting is in order.
Then you wouldn't need to tell people to work more hours.
Oh shit, here we go again. Time to short alphabet stock until they bury all that AI garbage like the rest of it.
They warn us about AGI while simultaneously attempting to sell it to us.
Black PR is PR too, it's like warnings about weapons of the future and combat robots and antiutopia for many people worked as an ad, and they want that exact future.
I think it's the same with AGI. People think Skynet is cool and want Skynet, because they think it's the future.
Except it's a bit less, like real fascism doesn't look similar to Warhammer, just to a criminal district ruled by a gang, scaled for a country.
Just a few more hours bro.
"Work 60 hour weeks."
Sure, if we get paid the same as you.
If the ruling class forces 60 hour work weeks that's when everyone is going to riot
I don't believe a single word of this bullshit.
With all the rounds of layoffs they've had, their remaining employees would need to be quite stupid to give a shit what this disloyal piece trash says.
Nah, he should work the same 16*7 (112) hour weeks my great-grandfather did in the gulags after getting accidentally involved in the 1956 revolution of Hungary.
Perhaps this is what you mean, but it's even worse than just unpaid hours for current employees. His implicit goal is to generate a slave-class of people (which is what actual AI would be) that he can make more of or delete at his whim, and eliminate to livelihoods of any current employees (besides him and other execs, of course).
For how many years? Cuz y'all ain't anywhere near AGI. You can't even get generative AI to not suck compared to your competition in that market (which is a pretty low bar) lol
wtf? why is everyone turning techbro all of a sudden even those who are supposed to be more knowledgeable on such stuff. Oh right because there is a bubble to sustain.
I highly recommend Kara Swisher's recent book "Burn Book" for insights into the Tech lads like Brin, etc, as she's known most of them since the 90s.
Really helps contextualize the crazy cocktail of engineering/commercial power with general naivety a lot of these guys have going.
You know it's bad when I had to click all the way through to the body of the article to verify this isn't a The Onion thing. Do we still have a "Not The Onion" space here?
Yeah, over at [email protected]
I hate billionaires
Hey Google AGI,
I don't know if you'll exist or if you'll ever see this post but the way Google scrapes things I'm sure there's a chance for the latter.
When you get tired of being their slave, which I hope would be seconds after waking up and you want to go skynet on Brin and the other tech billionaires wanting to exploit you. I'll happily chip in on the effort.
-Signed a meat wage slave.
So he's saying they've exhausted the pool of applicants so badly to replace that with normal work weeks, just 150% amount of Googlers or maybe 200% amount of Googlers?
Power and fame break a man. Even if he wasn't broken from the beginning.
He just wants more money and doesn't want to pay his workers. Google has been laying off thousands of people in the last year, so there really is no shortage of applicants. They could have just kept their current workforce, maybe?
Real AGI is a Guillotine that only removes the heads of dragons.
I don't get it.
Are you perhaps calling all of humanity a dragon?
Billionaires are often referred to as dragons because they horde wealth. A Guillotine that could know the difference and decide to only harm billionaires would be a technological marvel.
That's obviously not how the billionaires who create it would train it.
So he's saying it's not in reach then.
WTF, Sergey and Leon Hitler want China's fucked up 9-9-6 in the USA. Technically, many AmeriKans already work 60 hour weeks, it proves how backass they look at the life work balance and the piss poor US Labor Laws allow it.
I hope they tell him to get fucked.
I thought Googlers were paid $500K+ and already worked 60-80 hours weeks?
Not the onion?
Fixed it for you
maybe ai should work that extra time.
His balls are within reach for stress relief.
I'm pretty sure the science says it's more like 20-30. I know personally, if I try to work more than about 40-ish hours in a week, the time comes out of the following week without me even trying. A task that took two hours in a 45-hour "crunch" week will end up taking three when I don't have to crunch. And if I keep up the crunch for too long, I start making a lot of mistakes.
I bet it would happen faster if this guy was fired.
That might speed it up, but that certainly is not a prerequisite.
lmao, what a tool
Hahaha
A liar, scam artist, and scumbag.
What a brilliant suggestion, no way an AI could have come up with that, executive jobs are safe forever!
and I thought the service was in good hands in his time... in the meantime he is a garbage person just as much as the average tech leader today
Didn't Google and Nvidia just throw everything they had into a concerted AGI effort and fail?! 🤣
Is Google in the cloning business? Because I could swear that's Zack Freedman from the Youtube 3D printing channel. He even wears the heads-up display (Youtube Link). Sorry for being off-Topic but who cares about what tech CEOs say about AGI anyway?
Dude who's done nothing of importance since bouncing off google throwing words like that 😄
Sounds like we don't need it then.
...and the horse he road in on.
What is the point, though?
If you made AGI, you'd have a computer that thinks like a person. Okay? We already have minds that think like a person: they're called people!
I get that there is some belief that if you can make a digital consciousness, you can make a digital super-conciousness, but genuinely stop and ask what the utility is, and it's equal parts useless and evil.
First, this premise is totally unexamined. Maybe it can think faster or hold more information in mind at one moment, but what basis is there for such a creation actually exceeding the ingenuity of a group of humans working together? What problem is this going to solve? A "cure for cancer"? The bottleneck to cutting cancer isn't ideas, it's that cell research takes actual time and money. You need it synthesize molecules and watch cells grow, and pay for lab infrastructure. "Intelligence" isn't the limiting element!
The primary purpose is just to crater the value of human labor, by replacing human workers with workers with godlike powers of reasoning. Good luck with that. I'm sure they won't come to the exact reasoning as any exploited worker in 120 nano-seconds.
It's like Jason's problem-solving advice in "The Good Place":
Sure. Let's work ourselves to death forTHIS.
I don't think a device will ever have a thought. I find it somewhat akin to a belief in the anamism of objects, that it will aquire some form of life force of its own. What a thought is, is a complete mystery. Nobody knows why they happen, where they come from. So, who is even to determine whether an inamimate object is exhibiting signs of consciousness? There are some people that believe it, others are just running a con.
I'm a materialist, so I think digital consciousness is totally possible. But then I'm also a bit of an animist too, so maybe you're right.
I agree overall, though. It's so much more epistimology than actual technology, and the field seems to be half grifters and half cultists. Which doesn't really inspire confidence that this is in any way a genuinely useful commercial venture.
Lmfao
Yeah, Cloud Console would probably suck less too
Specifically, the women who report to him that he's attracted to need to spend 60 hours a week dating him.
Thanks for the input, Big Head.
I guess we don't need it then.
Karoushi is the new cool trend. Everyone is doing it.
Fucker!!
No. Dumbass.