Wildeford pushes back on AI acceleration research: 1.4x vs 2x barely changes the picture
peterwildeford · x · 2026-11-13
Haydn Belfield argues people may be updating too much on AIFP/METR-style AI acceleration findings, which rest on three questionable assumptions: 2x acceleration (what if it's 1.4x?), 80% AI-attributable progress (what if it's 50%?), and no clear bottlenecks or steep diminishing returns to scaling.
Peter Wildeford replies that even moving from 2x to 1.4x "doesn't change the picture all that much".
Related event: Researchers Push Back on METR's AI Acceleration Findings(4 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- 'Humans as happy dogs': a debate on autonomy under superintelligence — zetalyrae · 2026-11-13
- Jun Song: backing open-source AI isn't about China, it's about knowledge belonging to humanity — kuchaev · 2026-11-13
- Quip urges Grok to 'do the utilitarian calculus' and solve P vs. NP — akbirthko · 2026-11-13
- Beff Jezos claims 'managerial class' conspired to push out founder-CEO at peak of singularity — beffjezos · 2026-11-13
- A designer's take on taste in the AI era: conducting, not just coordinating — tomjohndesign · 2026-11-13
- How AI quietly flipped from a means to accelerate tech into the end goal itself — zetalyrae · 2026-11-13