Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

60% Positive

Analyzed from 757 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#cancer#llm#diseases#maybe#https#com#amodei#cured#said#based

Discussion (21 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

GPersonabout 1 hour ago
I had a conversation with Opus 5 about Amodei’s belief that most human diseases will be cured in 5-10 years. It said that technically “most diseases” are rare genetic conditions, and apparently that the science of these is basically already finished (and has been since a while before LLM based AI took off). These can be cured with gene editing therapies and what’s missing are “delivery vehicles and economic/regulatory models.” It predicted by the mid 2040s these will have treatments. It predicted the “big burden” diseases however won’t be cured due to increased intelligence but may become manageable chronic conditions by the mid 2040s. And it predicted that it would be until the 2060s until most of the disease burden is actually alleviated around the world.

Interestingly when I asked it how much of the speed up of curing most human diseases will likely be creditable to LLM based AI it said only a small portion (maybe a 5-10 year speed up) and possibly that LLM based AI will slow humanity down, essentially because it produces so much bs to comb through (“polluting the literature with plausible synthetic findings”). It says the AI technology which is actually helpful in biology is AlphaFold, RFdiffusion, etc..

jdlshore26 minutes ago
Okay, you told us what it said. Now what do you think? Do you have any expertise in this field? Do you have reason to believe that an LLM has the ability to predict the future with any accuracy (and if so, why)?

If we want to hear from an LLM, we can ask it ourselves. What are you bringing to the conversation?

syntaxingabout 1 hour ago
The issue with “AI” is how toxic it feels. Feels grimy like social media. Just like social media, I haven’t introduced any of it to my young kids nor do I plan to until they’re teens. At most I give them access to local AI through home assistant. I have a coworker who have kids of similar age and had to get rid of all his echos when Alexa started feeding his son new Lego sets as “Christmas gift ideas” to tell his parents.
treetalkerabout 2 hours ago
Amodei's original toot:

- https://twitter.com/darioamodei/status/2088758819304443967 / https://xcancel.com/darioamodei/status/2088758819304443967

> I do agree that the public has a negative view of AI (and that this is a big problem), but I don’t think it is primarily caused by me or any other AI leader warning about AI’s risks. I think it is fundamentally a crisis of trust.

Pairs well with "Dario's wife tried to raise money from Epstein for a porn studio" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49294219).

siva7about 2 hours ago
> but I don’t think it is primarily caused by me or any other AI leader warning about AI’s risks.

True, how about this:

> I think we might be six to twelve months away from when the model is doing most, maybe all of what software engineers do end-to-end.”

barrysaunders12 minutes ago
oh, is that all?
Daishimanabout 1 hour ago
Maybe someone here who works for a living doing pharma research might chime in but to me "AI curing cancer" makes about as much sense as "datacenters in space".

The biggest barrier for pharma research AFAIK doesn't have anything to do with finding candidate targets and corresponding drugs, there's thousands and thousands of those and progress for finding candidates as it stands is quite good, but all that pales in comparison to the time and cost of developing the actual candidates, then engaging in medical trials at all levels and waiting for results and then developing the engineering for manufacturing at scale and at cost, as usually all modern monoclonal antibody therapies run in the tens of thousands of dollars. How is AI supposed to help at accelerating Phase 3 trials? How is it supposed to help us find better bioreactors?

mitchdoogle36 minutes ago
If we knew the answers to those questions, we would have a cure for cancer.
akomtuabout 2 hours ago
To conjure fire from the skies, in other words. But the way technology works is it solves a problem by introducing other problems, and if they plan to fix cancer by messing with DNA, guess what side effects there will be.
sekh608 minutes ago
Probably new cancers.
owebmasterabout 3 hours ago
As Amodei goes getting more attention, he shows that he's as disconnected from the real world as Sam Altman.
throw3108222 minutes ago
He's saying "people had enough of us saying AI will cure cancer, what we need to do to regain their trust is to deliver on our promises".

HN reaction: he makes absurd promises, he's disconnected from reality.

Avicebronabout 2 hours ago
He's at least vocalizing he understands there is a crisis of trust. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49323245
owebmasterabout 2 hours ago
Then goes to say people want the cure for cancer from AI. People wanna good jobs, a place to live without paying rent and free time to enjoy life.
beeringabout 2 hours ago
I commonly see people online say something along the lines of, “instead of curing cancer we got a stupid chatbot.” Dario is simply responding to what people say they want.
Aboutplantsabout 3 hours ago
Prove it
giancarlostoroabout 2 hours ago
Sam Altman made a similar remark, in the case of Sam Altman though, GPT has been making breakthroughs in mathematics which is rather impressive, I could see AI helping to unlock more about cancer.
leftouterjoinsabout 2 hours ago
Maybe he could convince some by picking up a cigarette habit.
Barrin92about 2 hours ago
I love that they're at this point not only adopting the apocalyptic worldview of Millenarian religious cults but also the faith healing marketing strategy. Waiting for the day when Claude makes someone walk out of a wheelchair after speaking in tongues
morganf39 minutes ago
This is such a good comment I wish I could upvote you 10x. I actually laughed outloud at your comparison to religious fundamentalists haha
bamboozledabout 2 hours ago
The way for AI to win over the public is for it not to be used to ruin peoples lives, kill people (autonomous weapons) and exacerbate the climate crisis just so a handful of rich people can get richer.

Even if cancer was solved, those problems would still exist because it's not about betterment of our rae. It's about rich people trying to get richer, everyone knows that, and that's why people hate it.

Edit, I should mention, it's being used to ruin the internet too with "slop".