AGI

tendeeznuts

Companies spending billions of dollars on chips that have no actual use case yet, and will likely be obsolete by the time said use case is developed. If AI/AGI is anything less than absolutely brick shittingly astounding, then they might be digging their own grave lol

idbp

someone found AGI

Equivalent-Fold8639

In business, that is considered a problem for a post-AGI world...

d-redze

Will the AGI know that it is going to be learning from inferior versions of itself, dead internet theory, at best. At worst it’s learning from the type of people who use WSB…..

TheKingInTheNorth

The neatly labeled, categorized, and scored human interactions on Reddit are possibly going to be the most valuable commodity on earth very soon. AGI is basically going to be King Neckbeard thanks to this site.

Suitable_Battle5699

The reason that he’s right isn’t because they’re going to create an AGI, it’s because there are many many jobs that are incredibly simple and formulaic. People don’t admit it or don’t realize it but this is the truth, making an AI smart enough to do a lot of basic office jobs isn’t difficult because most of those boomers you see huffing and puffing down the halls looking busy are only actually working 15 percent of their week.

New-Combination-668

Short term gains are taxed at whatever tax bracket you are currently in. This could be 12%, 24% or even higher depending on your AGI. Google current tax brackets but I think the 24% bracket is ~ 90K to 199k.

Taiwanboy73

Doesn't matter how much money they burn, if AGI doesn't work then it's going to be another shitshow like Facebook's Meta.

boboleponge

yeah, he might not care about spending 50 billion a year because it's not his. That being said it would be a reasonable investment if we were sure to achieve AGI

Easy-Yogurt4939

It’s not a single problem. It’s all problems, that’s what AGI literally means. If anything, there is not enough smart people to solve this. Unless we lower the standard of AGI. The moment it’s conceived should necessarily equate to singularity event cause by definition it should be able to improve itself.

Llanite

Google deepmind's mission statement: creating an AI with awareness and "autonomously learns and adapts". Meta FAIR's: "understand the nature of intelligence so that we might create intelligent machines". Is that not what AGI is? I'm aware that LLMs are just statistics but if it doesn't help advance AGI in anyway, why do they all have their own model?

jojoyahoo

> The algorithms are basically the same as the ones detailed in the latest-and-greatest textbooks on the subject that I used in grad school. That in no way proves those algorithms will ever achieve AGI. There's a lot of debate in academia whether or not just throwing more data and compute at a neural net (at least with our current conception of how to define a cogent objective function that maps onto intelligence) is a failing paradigm.

NeptuneToTheMax

Who aside from Sam Altman is claiming to be making an AGI? Tech giants are largely investing because their shareholders would be upset if they didn't.  If we get away from the term AI and start calling them large language models then the illusion disappears. They're just statistic models that predict the next word in a sentence based on what came before it. It turns out that when you train them on large enough sample sizes they happen to come up with sentences that are true a lot of the time. It's an interesting emergent property to be sure, but a tool that is sometimes right and other times confidently wrong with no way of predicting when it will work or not has fairly limited use cases. It's been 4 years since gpt3 was released and and very few people actually use these technologies for anything useful in their day to day life.  Language models will no doubt give us big advances in natural language interfaces and stuff like language translation, but pull back the curtain and they have no smarts (e.g. knowledge or reasoning) of their own. 

Ma4r

That is true, the comparison merely tries to give a sense of scale, that is, current LLMs are still relatively small. Nobody knows how large a model needs to be for AGI, but many suspects we'll need one that is larger than a human's, simply because there is a hard limit to the amount of information you can store in a limited number of parameters. Also, regarding your comment on development, although companies are throwing money on advancing the engineering of neural networks, we haven't seen much progress on the theoretical side where we are still lacking. Which makes sense as there is little monetary incentive on theoretical advancements. Most theoretical break throughs take at least 20 years to commercialise , and many of them will fail without ever generating any profits. The fastest theoretical breakthrough to be put into application was probably the nuclear bomb, taking only 10 years, but we needed the backing of several super powers and a world war to achieve that. Right now companies are racing to advance practical applications of AI due to its frothy monetization opportunity. The issue is that there are still theoretical gaps in how we would be able to achieve AGI. At one point, once we've reached the limits of our current theoretical knowledge, it will be another decade or two of stagnation like what happened around the 2000s.

Llanite

I'm not an ai scientist so please enlighten me. Are you saying that 3 largest tech companies in the world who all had the same goal of creating an AGI, all invested tens of billions into an off branch that don't bring then any closer to their goal?

Ma4r

False, transformers have been around since 1990. Did you even read the paper? The main breakthrough in that paper is LTSTM attention mechanism that is trainable in practical applications. LTSTM itself was the newest concept used in this paper(1997). In layman's terms, the main breakthrough is the an LTSTM implementation that was parallelizable and thus was significantly cheaper to train than previous iterations, that is all. Nothing in the paper introduced new mechanisms or concepts that would enable AGI.

SaneLad

Creepy fuck. Also he's full of shit. LLMs are not AGI nor anywhere close to it. Anyone who understands how they work knows this. He's not stupid enough to believe it, so he's just full of shit.

waterproofpatch

"we're making AGI"

kaminoteter

at least AGI is a more interesting concept to go balls-out on than renting out office space

ankercrank

We’re never going to see AGI in our lifetimes. It’s way too complex.

krisko11

Llama 3 and Mark’s 12 billion are remarkable and they beat out gpt4 with an 8B model imagine what Altman can do with 50 and their talent. AGI is worth trillions so this quote can only be taken as MSFT calls 2026 Dec

rspinoza192

To be fair, if they actually are getting closer to AGI and can realistically achieve it, which I doubt will happen in the next 10 years, 50B a year is a small cost to pay for how insanely revolutionary that would be. The first one to invent/create one will hold so much global power and influence together with the country or government that will take advantage of it first.

FearTheOldData

Exactly. The LLM model just ain't it for AGI. Stupid as hell and very close to saturation

The-Phantom-Blot

"It's totally worth it!" To whom? How would an AGI benefit mankind? How would it benefit me? I see how it might benefit a modern-day robber baron tech overlord. Is it possible that Sam Altman being uniquely positioned to benefit from control of such a device makes him extra-willing to spend other people's money to get one?

aka0007

Seems a lot of the recent advancement is due to the hardware maturing sufficiently. As to the cost factor of training larger and more complex models, very true, but everyone is working on making more efficient AI computers which now one big focus seems on making bigger pieces of silicon and overcoming reticle limits, which should lead to over the coming years with increasingly efficient and powerful AI computers that can train much larger models without increases in cost. Also regarding AGI... no one knows how many parameters you actually need for that. Trying to compare to neurons a human has is only a general guide towards what you need for AGI, however as computers are not exactly the same as organic minds there is a lot of uncertainty what is actually needed to do so.

FaithlessnessNew3057

>Eventually some clever monkes jump from the tree and start building AGI. Very smart and well informed point. That's certainly how AI works and AGI will be nothing more than monkeys on a typewriter. Any day now!

red_purple_red

AGI will still be limited by current compute power. Not very useful to have an AGI that can drive better than a human when the chips needed to run it can't yet fit in a car. Better to take it slow and let Moore's law do its thing.

Ma4r

Eh, not really, the stuff used in LLMs has been around for over 30 years, it's quite literally nothing new. There were a few new things here and there that they needed to do to deal with the increased model size, but these things are very subtle and not what most would consider revolutionary. We just decided to throw all the data, money, and compute power at it to see what was possible. LLMs won't become AGI, it lacks the capability of iterative self improvement. Its layers simply weren't constructed in a way that allows it to. You are right about intelligence, but you need to remember even dogs have 500 million neurons while the largest single model LLMs in the world only have around 150 mil,(humans have 86 billion in comparison). Costs also do not scale linearly for training these models and that is the crux of the issue. But what about GPT-4 then that has over 1 billion neurons? Well GPT 4 is just faking it, it is what's called a Mixture of Experts model, in layman's terms it's 16 narrow AIs in a trenchcoat pretending to be AGI. Although this works great initially, it does not scale and will never reach the full potential of a monolithic 1 billion neuron model. Training a 200 mil node model costs 2 times the amount than training 2*100 mil node models. It's the reason why they went with MoE , it allows them to break down the model and train the 16 experts separately with reasonable costs, but at the end of the day it does not scale into AGI.

Ma4r

Eh, not really, the stuff used in LLMs has been around for over 30 years, it's quite literally nothing new. There were a few new things here and there that they needed to do to deal with the increased model size, but these things are very subtle and not what most would consider revolutionary. We just decided to throw all the data, money, and compute power at it to see what was possible. LLMs won't become AGI, it lacks the capability of iterative self improvement. Its layers simply weren't constructed in a way that allows it to. You are right about intelligence, but you need to remember even dogs have 500 million neurons while the largest single model LLMs in the world only have around 150 mil,(humans have 86 billion in comparison). Costs also do not scale linearly for training these models and that is the crux of the issue. But what about GPT-4 then that has over 1 billion neurons? Well GPT 4 is just faking it, it is what's called a Mixture of Experts model, in layman's terms it's 16 narrow AIs in a trenchcoat pretending to be AGI. Although this works great initially, it does not scale and will never reach the full potential of a monolithic 1 billion neuron model. Training a 200 mil node model costs 2 times the amount than training 2*100 mil node models. It's the reason why they went with MoE , it allows them to break down the model and train the 16 experts separately with reasonable costs, but at the end of the day it does not scale into AGI.

kikal27

Sorry to break it to you, buts that's exactly how natural evolution works. We have all this dumb animals that could perform really simple tasks during millions of years. Eventually some clever monkes jump from the tree and start building AGI. Once we accept that we are a sub product of evolution and that intelligence is just the capability of processing stimuli, reflect about the past and predict the future, I can see how AGI is just a matter of time and the right click in some LLM

neutralpoliticsbot

close to AGI? no way man

lafindestase

AGI has the potential to eliminate all jobs not just the “trivial” ones, unless you’re considering all jobs trivial.

NootropicGuy

I doubt we’re going to reach AGI by just stacking transformers on top of each other but I could be completely wrong

FaithlessnessNew3057

Nobody is saying he's wrong but good corporate governance generally requires a plan with some level of confidence of success before sinking billions of dollars into a project. Its like if I was able to invent a teleporter it would also be worth trillions if applied effectively but obviously I shouldnt be given billions to burn on research unless I can demonstrate a realistic path to actually create it.  Nobody is questioning the economic value of AGI they're questioning his ability to deliver it. 

StruanT

What do you think all the researchers are doing? Not trying anything new? It already sounds smarter than most of the people on the internet. Something a lot of people thought completely impossible just a few years ago. What naysayers seem to be missing here is that they only have to do it once. It could be one single algorithmic advancement to get to AGI. It may be a one in a million shot, but thousands of people trying thousands of times... I wouldn't bet against those odds.

allllusernamestaken

> But I have a hard time believing we're really going to achieve AGI in 3-5 years if we just throw a few hundred billion at it. I have textbooks on artificial intelligence from the 1970s. The algorithms are basically the same as the ones detailed in the latest-and-greatest textbooks on the subject that I used in grad school. The only thing that's changed is how much processing power we have today vs 10 years ago, 20 years, 30 years ago... OpenAI can afford to pay absurd comp packages to get the smartest people working on a single, specific problem. They can also afford the obscene cost of processing power for all of this, and they have access to the cutting edge GPUs from Nvidia where a single unit is more powerful than most supercomputers were 15 years ago. I have no idea how feasible it actually is, or how far they will get or how quickly, I just know that nobody has thrown this many smart people and processing power at a single problem before.

trollindisguise

This guy is such a psychopath, and he’s got all these naive engineers believing he’s some kind of AGI messiah. When it becomes weaponized you’re going to see a lot of pikachu faces.

Yogidoggies

AGI is a disaster. [trust no robot](https://trustnorobot.com)

randyranderson-

I’m sure there’s some dollar value where we get a lot closer, a lot faster. Like 1T spent on chips, data, and energy would make significant strides, but I think the real bottleneck is time and hardware R&D. Things really picked up with AI-training GPUs, but we will only get so far with that. Eventually we’ll need some new breakthrough computing technology to do what’s needed for AGI. And for all we know it requires unbelievable amounts of energy that make it impractical without fusion or something.

pepesilviafromphilly

"we are making AGI" gotta be a red flag for any investor. 

Xtianus21

Calls on Calls on Calls on Calls on Calls on NVDA bitches. people don't get it. They building AGI bro 

Redditaccount2322

Dumb take. We’re not close to AGI and investing resources in a meaningful way should always be a consideration. If we set a mandate in the US that every student must enroll in CS courses to help build AGI that would be a huge net negative on society. It works until the money spout dries up and we haven’t made meaningful progress towards the end goal. That being said ALCC will probably pump due to hype cause regards think fusion is 5 years away instead of 50. Who the fuck invests in a startup that wouldn’t be profitable by the time they’re retired? Open to criticism if I’m off base on my assumptions as I’m not the most technical person in these areas but my understanding is we have huge hurdles on both these goals that still require lots of time and tech to solve

agoldprospector

I think what he's saying is he believes AGI is priceless and someone needs to build it, and cost should be irrelevant. Presumably because the good to humanity in general will be worth more than whatever the cost may be. Certainly the chatbots we have are not worth that. But it is arguable that AGI or ASI may be, who knows.

pixelblue1

Considering full self driving has been 2 years away for like 10 years, I highly doubt we get AGI anytime soon. I understand computer vision is a difficult problem, whereas a really smart LLM might be more doable. But I have a hard time believing we're really going to achieve AGI in 3-5 years if we just throw a few hundred billion at it.

throwaway12222018

I agree LLMs aren't really the endgame here. I think there's a lot of hype around them that will fizzle out over the next 2-3 years. AI is always going to be a thing but I think anyone talking about AGI needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

NeptuneToTheMax

There's no reason to believe there's a path to AGI based on any current large language models.  Sam is a grifter telling his investors they're making AGI while at the same time trying to get Congress to shut down his competitors because he doesn't really have anything special to set him apart. 

throwaway12222018

Impressed with Sam generally, but not sure I agree with him on this point. It would have been silly for a King 1000 years ago to spend all of his resources trying to build a functioning TI-84 with an abacus the size of the pyramids. It made way more sense to discover physics, quantum mechanics, transistors, etc. and invent the computer, and then build one for practically zero cost that could fit in your pocket. I think this applies to Sam. It may not really make sense to build AGI or even try to build AGI with conventional computers. There might need to be a cross-disciplinary physics, neuroscience, and engineering breakthrough before AGI is actually within the set of tractable problems.

floppy_panoos

And absolutely NONE of this will matter when AGI is official, which at the current pace, should be sooner than later.

beenalegend

think altman gonna be first to AGI?

IHadTacosYesterday

Nah, 10 years won't cut it. We're so far away. They need massive breakthroughs in waveguide technology. Like a HUGE revolution. The problem with *real* AR, is that the field of view is a tiny box. Magic Leap had this problem, HoloLens has this problem, Meta and Apple are dealing with this problem with their AR prototypes. It's not happening any time soon. Meta and Apple better both hope they get AGI cooking in their backrooms and ask AGI how to make an effective waveguide display that doesn't have the FOV of a postage stamp

WinningWatchlist

Copied from my comment on r/stocks: Likely it won't go over 1000 again, the craze is gone unless we discover something TRULY insane like AGI

theupandunder

I think more interesting is how big their share of global total work/value/services they can attain. Where are they now? A fraction of a percent? If they crack AGI, robotics etc

WinningWatchlist

Likely it won't go over 1000 again, the craze is gone unless we discover something TRULY insane like AGI.

sluttyseinfeld

AAPL need to announce AGI to stop the correction

kalakesri

an AGI in control of the nukes makes me feel safer than the current situation

kalakesri

if I was an AGI i would play dumb and stay in the shadows and take control of all the algo traders and pump and dump the market to get capital to buy more GPUs for myself

sharmoooli

use easements and tax credits to lower AGI

acctgamedev

I think we're much further from that than the tech companies let on. They have bots that are good at a few tasks that wow the crowds, but ask ChatGPT or co-pilot how to do something and it just regurgitates sites that it finds on the internet. These tools are nice to have, but they don't generally customize what it finds to the use case you ask about. That said, when it comes, I agree that AGI is something we really need to be concerned about.

Lazerys

AGI is still safe. It's the ASI that comes after that you should be scared of. (Artificial superintelligence)

Andrew_Higginbottom

AGI is 5 years away. AGI is the Artificial intelligence we should be fearing not the current AI. Artificial General Intelligence is where you could be talking to it online and you wouldn't be able to differentiate it from a human.

CowsCatsCannabis

I don’t think you know what AGI is.

CompetitionDry6359

Are you saying all the talk of AGI at OpenAI is just bullshit to keep the valuation high? 

Illustrious-Jacket68

Why not do both? do option 1 with a portion? That will also allow you to manage the tax consequences over a period of time and keep you below. I work for a public company too and every time i get a grant, i now sell that much out of the long term, at the lower strike price. depending on your income, you can keep to a lower tax hit, ideally long term capital gains if you can keep your AGI low.

ComprehensiveSwan698

Musks best chance at truly autonomous FSD is if Daddy Huang makes the greatest semiconductor on earth. AGI will be a game changer for autonomous transportation

DisGuyFawks

> Elon will say "AGI by next year" every time he speaks now. Precisely. Except his GrokAI is basically a pile of shit compared to the leaders out there.

lostredditorlurking

So instead of "FSD by next year", Elon will say "AGI by next year" every time he speaks now.

guanzo91

That does make sense, but I don't see how that conflicts with what I'm saying. If I increase AGI by X, then reduce it by X, then the net tax for that trade is 0. No?

bluehat9

Because 1.5k in AGI doesn’t equal 1.5k in taxes. If you reduce your AGI by 1k, you don’t save 1k in taxes, you save whatever your marginal tax rate, times the reduction in AGI. If your at 20%, you’d save $200 by reducing your AGI by 1000. Make sense?

guanzo91

What's the difference between "taxes owed" and "taxable income / AGI". A 1.5k gain increases AGI by 1.5, a 1.5k loss reduces AGI by 1.5. Net change is zero. Therefore no taxes owed on the gain. Is this incorrect?

bluehat9

A 1.5k loss doesn’t reduce your taxes owed by 1.5k. Thats when you’re getting confused. A 1.5k loss reduces your taxable income / AGI by 1.5k.

Singularity-42

The demand for AI compute will only increase and rapidly. Unless there is another breakthrough similar to the transformer the only way forward is to scale up large language models in both size and training time. Both will need massive compute. As the models get more useful and get it to the AGI range the big tech will start eating up the economy at a rapid pace. Now we don't know who the big winner will be on the software side (if there is a single big winner at all), but as already shown with NVDA the chip makers will benefit no matter what, especially the actual foundries like TSMC. I think what we have seen with NVDA over the past year is just a little teaser of how this is going to play out.

p00pTy

AI is the biggest bullshit on the market, second only to AGI. tech knows this, and the market should too, so why the fuck is NVDA so overvalued?

mthlmw

The way I read the proposal was it only applies to those with AGI over 1 million, but would impact **all** long-term gains and qualified dividends. On the extreme end, if you earned one dollar under a million of only those types, breaking the threshold would be a significant tax jump.

AdagioHonest7330

Gains over $1M or AGI?

theFoolishEngineer

Energy. We’re in the beginnings of a multi-decade race to create AGI. Repeatedly known that the only foreseeable bottleneck is Energy. See Microsoft’s Stargate Project. Given a choice, I’d rather hold XLE than USD over a 3 year period.

Used_Wolverine6563

Do you know how many foreign investment funds invest in Nasdaq? Do you know how much foreign retail investors trade USA stocks?? The world doesn't revolve around the USA. "In 2021, the bottom half of taxpayers earned 10.4 percent of total AGI and paid 2.3 percent of all federal individual income taxes. The top 1 percent earned 26.3 percent of total AGI and paid 45.8 percent of all federal income taxes." "In the United States, individual income taxes (federal, state, and local) were the primary source of tax revenue in 2022, at 45.3 percent of total tax revenue. Social insurance taxes (including payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare) made up the second-largest share at 21.9 percent, followed by consumption taxes at 15.7 percent, and property taxes at 10.6 percent. Corporate income taxes accounted for 6.5 percent of total U.S. tax revenue in 2022." Sorry to burst your bubble but most of the Taxes paid in the USA came from the stock market of 1% of the population... not from regular citizens or corporations taxes. And you proved that Tax revenue is limited, like in any country.

Hairy_Advice6669

Yes, because technology drives productivity which drives growth. To all those giving regression to the mean arguments or short term issues with the tech industry, they don't quite understand how transformational AI and ML have been. And any company that has the best models is going to have the tools to build the next best models and that is just going to compound. There is almost no parallel to technology that keeps improving itself and does so at an exponential rate. So yes, this is unprecedented.  And any company that ultimately comes up with AGI will basically rule the world. From my own experience LLM tools have increased developer productivity massively this year. And we are just scratching the surface, so the next few years are indeed going to be transformational. And I am a strong believer in what Ray Kurzweil thinks about this. https://www.ted.com/talks/ray_kurzweil_the_accelerating_power_of_technology/transcript One caveat though is that I am as clueless as anyone else when coming to stock picking for technology.  But any tech index fund should give you sufficient exposure to realize these exponential gains.

bartturner

AGI - Artificial General Intelligence.

tropicsun

ELI5 and also what’s AGI?

bartturner

The most amazing one was DeepMind for $500 million. Microsoft paid 20 times that for less than half of OpenAI. With no board seats and get nothing once OpenAI declares AGI. Where Google gets everything and has total control.

BadFish918

AGI and ASI will be achieved within 10 years. Narrow AI before you know it. Hang on tight.

zztopsthetop

Automotive self driving is a much simpler problem than a fully autonomous humanoid robot. You're right on that. You can see that from problem definition alone: The humanoid needs to be able to learn online (there's no finite list of tasks you want the robot to be able to do), assuming that you want it to be an imitation learner ( to be able to see a task executed once or twice, filter out the relevant aspects and execute it, because expecting it to independently solve a given problem is essentially AGI ) for simple tasks as a minimum to be commercially viable, while the driving software has to do one well-defined task at least as good as a human. The robot problem space is exponentially bigger, with at least as many edge cases present. Automotive autonomy will eventually become an established thing, I'm quite confident in that. Autonomous robots in very well-defined settings are feasible. I'm not that optimistic on the commercial success of autonomous robots that don't have a clearly defined set of tasks and/or environments within the next 2 years. The tools just aren't there, yet.

EtherCJ

You don't get a tax deduction if your AGI is over $87k (in 2024), so it will be an after tax IRA which means that: - it's less available - you don't get taxed on realized capital gains every year, but your withdraws will be taxed as ordinary income. At your income level, I expect you will have plenty of retirement money and so ordinary income will be a worse tax deal than capital gains. But this is a guess.

Guinness

No, because Tesla is losing orders due to no one wanting to be associated with Elon. I don’t give a fuck if the Model S becomes AGI overnight. I’m not giving that twat waffle idiot any of my money.

Guinness

No, because Tesla is losing orders due to no one wanting to be associated with Elon. I don’t give a fuck if the Model S becomes AGI overnight. I’m not giving that twat waffle idiot any of my money.

Guinness

No, because Tesla is losing orders due to no one wanting to be associated with Elon. I don’t give a fuck if the Model S becomes AGI overnight. I’m not giving that twat waffle idiot any of my money.

aoxl

For some context, I have a basic knowledge of the stock market so I'm entirely open to any criticism or advice and it will all be appreciated. I'm generally risk adverse (though my holdings might not necessarily reflect that) and would love to know how to better round out my portfolio as well as general advice given my current financial standing. I'm currently single and 34yo if that matters. At the moment, I feel like I have inconsequential shares of well performing stocks and not enough in safer ones (VT). Given I can spare maybe ~$500/month to invest, I often have trouble deciding which to invest that money into or which ones to let go. Some quick points: * I have no debt. * I do not own a home. * ~$150k AGI. * 70k in my savings. * 60k in 401k and I believe I can double my contribution to max it out. * In the event of company IPO, there is potential of reaping a substantial amount of cash (~300k gross, but hard to tell atm). My current holdings (I've only invested ~$18k to date): * 7 shares of MSFT @$250. * 8 shares of TSM @$105. * 10 shares of AAPL @$10. * 25 shares of VT @$88. * 302 shares of PLTR @$13 * 1200 shares of GCEH @$2

JonathanL73

Algorithmic AI scripted trading has been around for at least a decade, with quants and Financial Engineer Analysts getting paid millions to come up with the perfect trading algorithms. The infamous “Flash crash” that happened was triggered by Algorithms trading against each other. No AGI trained off of publicly available data from the internet is going to come up with a competitive algo strategy. There are already AI-managed index funds & ETFs, but those still require a lot of human guidance and sorting.

Valkanaa

Today's secret word is "tax loss harvesting". In addition to making your LTG tax free (offset losses) you can deduct $3k/yr off your AGI and roll the remaining loss forward to upcoming tax years

karangoswamikenz

Model3/Y are still some of the best EVs out there. Their charging network is the best and has no competition. That will keep sales going. Company can keep thriving just making Model3/Y at scale and reducing price of production and sale. But that doesn't mean the stock is growth stock. It would just be a normal car company stock than a tech stock. Tech stock needs constant tech innovation. Not Cybertruck bullshit. IMO if Tesla wants to win, they need to get Optimus to do my dishes, laundry, cook for me or cut veggies and meat for me or beat my meat for me while wearing a silicone costume. Sell those for 35k and watch people take loans for that tech. But long way to go before AGI and AGI is needed for otpimus. So the company is an extremely long term investment and until then it will just shatter.

aoxl

For some context, I have a basic knowledge of the stock market so I'm entirely open to any criticism or advice and it will all be appreciated. I'm generally risk adverse (though my holdings might not necessarily reflect that) and would love to know how to better round out my portfolio as well as general advice given my current financial standing. I'm currently single and 34yo if that matters. At the moment, I feel like I have inconsequential shares of well performing stocks and not enough in safer ones (VT). Given I can spare maybe ~$500/month to invest, I often have trouble deciding which to invest that money into or which ones to let go. Some quick points: * I have no debt. * I do not own a home. * ~$150k AGI. * 70k in my savings. * 60k in 401k and I believe I can double my contribution to max it out. * In the event of company IPO, there is potential of reaping a substantial amount of cash (~300k gross, but hard to tell atm). My current holdings (I've only invested ~$18k to date): * 7 shares of MSFT @$250. * 8 shares of TSM @$105. * 10 shares of AAPL @$10. * 25 shares of VT @$88. * 302 shares of PLTR @$13 * 1200 shares of GCEH @$2.6

The_Redoubtable_Dane

Tesla cars are collecting the computer vision data that Tesla will use to make bipedal robots with AGI. This should be obvious to all.

unclefire

huh? No. AGI is 10 years. Computer vision is less than two years (and frankly has been around for a long time, just now they can use better techniques really)

shaolinmasterkillr

The x-axis is time though, which, while immature, suggests we developed AGI before everything else after it on the chart. AGI is like the end goal of all other AI work, and straight up does not exist right now. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding though.

_WhatchaDoin_

According to the graph: Computer vision is arriving, and will be plateauing in less than 2 years. We are very well advanced there. AGI is more than 10 years away to be plateauing, and people still have too high of an expectations. Generative AI is peaking right now, and people have really high expectations and will start hitting a bunch of limitations. It is 5 to 10 years away to be rock solid. That statement is probably very controversial right now. 🤣

shaolinmasterkillr

AGI happens before computer vision? What is this graph?

Dry-Nectarine-2372

Look at GAU and CXB....consider AGI as well I sleep good

chilpanduk

Traditional ML is closer to statistical learning, not GenAI. Sure, it’s nowhere close to AGI but it’s not some variation of statistics either.

Ding-Dongon

> Only ai people see are chat bots and video/graphics projects. Did you expect to see AGI a month after ChatGPT 3 came out? Dozens of companies are working on their models behind the scenes. What does it have to do with what the average person currently sees lol? And nonetheless all of it has to be powered somehow. Nvidia is selling the backbone, not the “AI“

RampantPrototyping

> As far as AI demands, it's not done. AI will be a never ending arms race. Even if AGI is achieved, there will be a race for AGI 2.0 and then 3.0 and so on and so on