> you just can’t play StarCraft that much better than the best humans
I could not disagree with this more.
Just the perfect micro part means that computers have a far higher ceiling than humans.
No, it is not possible in theory for humans to have perfect micro with thousands of APM!
We're talking about hundred unit zergling swarms perfectly dodging tank shells. Hundreds of APM at multiple locations on the map. Perfect timing and placement for every order.
This is like saying an aimbot wouldn't make a top CS pro much better.
Having written the AI systems for Robocode bots 15 years ago, they perform at such a higher level than humans that there is no way, given all the time in the world, a human can compete with a full statistical targeting and movement system. We just don't think in that way.
I think the "you" they refer to there is the hypothetical other skilled human, not a computer. The wording is confusing but I think they're just saying that the human players will reach a ceiling with each other (they then contrast this with real life where the ceiling is always moving). That whole paragraph is a bit muddy with the point it's trying to make.
Anthropic is deemed a betrayer and a supply chain risk for actually enforcing their principles.
OpenAI agrees to be put in the same position as Anthropic.
It seems like you must actually somehow believe that history will repeat itself, Hegseth will deem OpenAI a supply chain risk too, then move to Grok or something?
There's surely no way that's actually what you believe...
If it's incredibly fast at a 2022 state of the art level of accuracy, then surely it's only a matter of time until it's incredibly fast at a 2026 level of accuracy.
I almost feel like the employee/employer distinction is actually worse than tariff fakery because at least tariffs are somewhat confusing to the average person, so you almost see why they get fooled.
But I feel like no-one would be fooled if you changed an e to an r on payslips (employee contribution to employer) - it's just obviously the same.
Any competent thinker should be able to structure an argument and present it in written form, that's an important skill to have.
If someone is unable to write an essay arguing something, unable to articulate complex thoughts and back them up with evidence, what does that indicate about their thinking?
I don't write essays either, but I'm sure I could. And maybe some of those docs or emails I write at work are made more effective by that.
There are literally hundreds of millions of people in the Anglosphere who have graduated from their education unable to coherently structure an argument and present it in written form.
It indicates nothing about their thinking. One of the smartest people I've known left school at 14 and couldn't read or write.
We mistake education for intelligence often. We mistake erudition for capability often. The thing you need to get a PhD is not intelligence, but the ability to follow directions and persevere. You certainly don't need to have any original thoughts, in fact they will only get in your way.
Being able to read or write, if given an opportunity to learn, certainly IS a marker of intelligence. That’s not a very high bar to pass considering toddlers can usually read. But it’s obviously not the only way to measure intelligence!
You claim the smartest person you ever met couldn’t read or write. So what kind of smarts did this person have? Genuinely curious. A really good memory? Emotional intelligence? Extremely persuasive?
I knew him for about 3 months, hung out with him regularly, before I figured out that he couldn't read. He was very good at manipulating the conversation to make me read things for him without me guessing it.
He paid off his mortgage by his mid-30's.
He taught himself to read and write alongside his eldest daughter when she learned. Keeping up with a kid while learning an entirely new skill is no minor thing.
He built his own house in the corner of a field without planning permission so that no-one knew he was there, and lived in it for long enough that he then didn't need planning permission.
He effectively retired in his 40's, and keeps bees for fun.
They call it "street smarts". He has it in spades. Also just genuinely a fun person to be around.
Maybe. But the education system was never designed for this kind of person. Challenging authority and doing things in unconventional ways is not tolerated in school. I think he dodged a bullet.
reply