Almost every interaction I have with these AI chatbots is still terrible.
Just yesterday I asked a question related to retirement planning and 401K allocations, Traditional vs Roth. I had a finical advisor tell me one thing, but I heard a contrary view from someone else that made some sense. The AI took the side of the finial advisor, assumed the standard dismissal of the contrarian, and that was that. I went on to explain the reasoning the contrarian gave, which was different from the assumptions, and injected some of my own thought on the topic. It then agreed that the contrarian was correct, I was correct, and the advice from the financial advisor only works under very controlled conditions, and with certain assumptions in place, and I'm better off doing what I'm doing, which fell more in line with the contrarian.
This did not feel like a chat with an intelligent being. It felt like a chat with a parrot. It starts by parroting the standard wisdom everyone knows, but frames it as gospel. Then, when challenged, it parrots back whatever it's told, as long as it's a decent and defensible argument.
For those who never push back on answers, they're going to have a bad time. For people who go too deep and use the AI as someone that affirms everything they say, they will also have a bad time. The answer to nearly everything in life is, "it depends". This is where personal opinions, experiences, style, etc come into play. The AI has none of this, so it can be pushed and pulled to any side of the "it depends" spectrum. Is that intelligence? Is there value in that?
As a tool, there is some utility. I don't deny that. As an all knowing technology that will take over the world, I'm not buying it.
You realize that most AIs will try to align with your world view right? For fun try the reverse and say you are worried about trusting your friend and wonder if you should accept the advice of the financial advisor.
That's my point. An intelligent person will adjust their views based on new information, but they're not just going to align with the worldview of whatever person they happen to be talking to. A person who does this is of little to no value, yet when AI does it people start making AGI claims.
I'm purging my brain of all the useless knowledge I've accumulated over the years and extending my cognition as far as it can go by relying on AI, and I've gained enough weight to survive the first round of famines. But I probably would have done both with or without an impending Singularity.
I have been getting flagged or near-flagged on many of my comments lately, so I will keep it short.
Approximately a year ago, perhaps closer to two, I posted an Ask HN[0].
You can either review the post, or take my word for it, but I was torn a new brown-eye for it, demeaned and even insulted for daring the ludicrous notion that such an absurdity was worth wondering about.
Fast forward to 2026, and one might now be insulted for wondering why it isn't plausible, if not inevitable to some extent.
I'd say a lot more, but I'm not in a fighting mood this evening. I'll just say that many of the folks here dismissing AI in the context of the "singularity", well, they tend to be intelligent, often technically informed, and with a fair number of karma tokens to play with. But I will tell you they are wrong. The only thing that will prevent, or defer what you are alluding to, would be a consensual pause or restriction in development. China has, thus far, made that a tricky proposition despite the efforts of Altman and Amodei et al, but consider that even if they manage to wangle a moratorium, development will absolutely not pause on the Pentagon side. Maybe the public side will slow down, but AI as 'defense', or as I prefer, weapon, will not pause for a nano second. And it will reach well beyond the extremes you suggest. And I am not sure there is anything one can do to prepare for that. My greatest concern is institutional capture, which we are already seeing.
Edit: All four frontier models have Pentagon contracts. Remember, Claude (Anthropic) assisted with operation Abduct Maduro, and works with Palantir. This is the direction things are moving. Just keep an eye on it, and read between the lines. I predicted this two years ago, and here it is. AI is not just about coding, or answering whimsical questions anymore.
No, for the same reason I'm not preparing for the second coming of Christ.
I'm quite sure that AI is going to change the world for better or worse - probably worse given that it's a hype-driven revolution being pushed by an accelerationist death cult of billionaire sociopaths with absolutely no serious regard for any of its many, many negative externalities - but "the singularity" is sci-fi religion. It isn't real.
Almost every interaction I have with these AI chatbots is still terrible.
Just yesterday I asked a question related to retirement planning and 401K allocations, Traditional vs Roth. I had a finical advisor tell me one thing, but I heard a contrary view from someone else that made some sense. The AI took the side of the finial advisor, assumed the standard dismissal of the contrarian, and that was that. I went on to explain the reasoning the contrarian gave, which was different from the assumptions, and injected some of my own thought on the topic. It then agreed that the contrarian was correct, I was correct, and the advice from the financial advisor only works under very controlled conditions, and with certain assumptions in place, and I'm better off doing what I'm doing, which fell more in line with the contrarian.
This did not feel like a chat with an intelligent being. It felt like a chat with a parrot. It starts by parroting the standard wisdom everyone knows, but frames it as gospel. Then, when challenged, it parrots back whatever it's told, as long as it's a decent and defensible argument.
For those who never push back on answers, they're going to have a bad time. For people who go too deep and use the AI as someone that affirms everything they say, they will also have a bad time. The answer to nearly everything in life is, "it depends". This is where personal opinions, experiences, style, etc come into play. The AI has none of this, so it can be pushed and pulled to any side of the "it depends" spectrum. Is that intelligence? Is there value in that?
As a tool, there is some utility. I don't deny that. As an all knowing technology that will take over the world, I'm not buying it.
You realize that most AIs will try to align with your world view right? For fun try the reverse and say you are worried about trusting your friend and wonder if you should accept the advice of the financial advisor.
That's my point. An intelligent person will adjust their views based on new information, but they're not just going to align with the worldview of whatever person they happen to be talking to. A person who does this is of little to no value, yet when AI does it people start making AGI claims.
If you find this interesting to think about, you would probably enjoy/be terrified by "AI 2077" https://ai-2027.com/
I'm purging my brain of all the useless knowledge I've accumulated over the years and extending my cognition as far as it can go by relying on AI, and I've gained enough weight to survive the first round of famines. But I probably would have done both with or without an impending Singularity.
> it feels like we are witnessing one of the most significant events in world history
Yes.
> Are You Preparing for the Singularity
No.
I have been getting flagged or near-flagged on many of my comments lately, so I will keep it short.
Approximately a year ago, perhaps closer to two, I posted an Ask HN[0].
You can either review the post, or take my word for it, but I was torn a new brown-eye for it, demeaned and even insulted for daring the ludicrous notion that such an absurdity was worth wondering about.
Fast forward to 2026, and one might now be insulted for wondering why it isn't plausible, if not inevitable to some extent.
I'd say a lot more, but I'm not in a fighting mood this evening. I'll just say that many of the folks here dismissing AI in the context of the "singularity", well, they tend to be intelligent, often technically informed, and with a fair number of karma tokens to play with. But I will tell you they are wrong. The only thing that will prevent, or defer what you are alluding to, would be a consensual pause or restriction in development. China has, thus far, made that a tricky proposition despite the efforts of Altman and Amodei et al, but consider that even if they manage to wangle a moratorium, development will absolutely not pause on the Pentagon side. Maybe the public side will slow down, but AI as 'defense', or as I prefer, weapon, will not pause for a nano second. And it will reach well beyond the extremes you suggest. And I am not sure there is anything one can do to prepare for that. My greatest concern is institutional capture, which we are already seeing.
0. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32534550
Edit: All four frontier models have Pentagon contracts. Remember, Claude (Anthropic) assisted with operation Abduct Maduro, and works with Palantir. This is the direction things are moving. Just keep an eye on it, and read between the lines. I predicted this two years ago, and here it is. AI is not just about coding, or answering whimsical questions anymore.
Are you actually using these agents on a day-to-day basis?
No, for the same reason I'm not preparing for the second coming of Christ.
I'm quite sure that AI is going to change the world for better or worse - probably worse given that it's a hype-driven revolution being pushed by an accelerationist death cult of billionaire sociopaths with absolutely no serious regard for any of its many, many negative externalities - but "the singularity" is sci-fi religion. It isn't real.