This in an incredibly uncharitable read, biased and redolent of motivated reasoning.
If you applied the same to almost any other set of predictions I think you could nitpick those too. It also lacks context (e.g yes 7-10 was an underestimate, but at time when there were like too and people were surprised that I said such models would become widespread). Even @robo here sees that you have been uncharitable.
The one that annoys me the most and makes me not even want to talk about the rest is re GPT-5. Practically everybody thought GPT-5 was imminent; I went out on a limb and said it would not be. I used it as an explicit specific yardstick (which I should be credited for) and that explicit yardstick was not met. Yet you are giving me zero credit.
You are just wrong about profits, inventing your own definition. Re adoption, many corporations have TRIED, but proofs of concept are not adoption. there have been loads of articles and surveys written about companies trying stuff out and not getting the ROI they expected.
I would be happy to respond in more detailed to a serious, balanced investigation that evaluated my predictions over time, going back to my 1998 article on distribution shift, but this ain’t it.
This in an incredibly uncharitable read, biased and redolent of motivated reasoning.
I would be happy to respond in more detailed to a serious, balanced investigation that evaluated my predictions over time, going back to my 1998 article on distribution shift, but this ain’t it.