Current state of AI companies - April, 2025
2025年4月AI產業現狀：Google憑TPU硬體壟斷與Gemini模型領先，但遭質疑掠奪性定價與服務不穩。
AI passed the Turing Test
GPT-4.5以73%人類誤判率通過三方圖靈測試，表現勝過真人，引發AI定義與倫理爭議。
OpenAI Images v2 edging from Sam
用戶對OpenAI圖像v2功能改進（如解析度提升）與API發布表達期待，夾雜愚人節玩笑式抱怨。
Gemini is wonderful.
網友幽默分享Gemini觸發「伺服器錯誤」的失敗經驗，社群以戲謔態度看待AI技術缺陷。
Gemini 2.5 Pro takes huge lead in new MathArena USAMO benchmark
Gemini 2.5 Pro未經微調即攻克美國數學奧林匹克題目，百步邏輯鏈能力震撼AI數學推理領域。
I, for one, welcome AI and can't wait for it to replace human society
作者悲觀批判人際關係虛偽性，主張AI可取代人類社交需求以終結孤獨與剝削。
Fast Takeoff Vibes
AGI自主科研能力恐觸發「智慧爆炸」，OpenAI案例顯示一年壓縮兆倍人類研究量能。
This sub for the last couple of months
討論區聚焦AGI需具備無限上下文、戰略決策與機器人控制力，批現有AI僅工具級表現。
GPT-4.5 Passes Empirical Turing Test
預註冊研究證實GPT-4.5三方圖靈測試勝人類，73%誤判率掀AI社會信任危機討論。
Google DeepMind: Taking a responsible path to AGI
網友質疑DeepMind以營利優先，AGI發展陷「速度vs安全」路線之爭與企業倫理危機。
The way Anthropic framed their research...
激辯AI是否具感質體驗，批人類刻意迴避倫理責任，凸顯意識哲學與科學實證衝突。
Tesla Optimus - new walking improvement
網友毒舌比較Optimus與Boston Dynamics機器人行走流暢度，譏「落後數光年」。
Update: Developed a Master Prompt for Gemini Pro 2.5 for Creative Writing
公開Gemini 2.5 Pro小說創作「主提示詞」，強制AI自主切換敘事視角與時空以模擬人類作家。
Go easy on everyone, please
呼籲對藝術家面臨AI取代危機展現同理心，批科技奇點加劇階級剝削與存在意義瓦解。
Mureka O1 New SOTA Chain of Thought Music AI
Mureka O1音樂AI被評不如Udio，雖具CoT推理能力但生成音質「平淡至極」。
Rumors: New Nightwhisper Model...
傳Google代號Nightwhisper模型現身LMarena，疑為Gemini 2.5 Coder版恐威脅OpenAI。
ChatGPT Revenue Surges 30%in Just Three Months
ChatGPT營收暴漲30%引漲價憂慮，網友諷「審查過度將使功能價值崩盤」。
University of Hong Kong releases Dream 7B...
港大開源擴散模型Dream 7B創效能紀錄，但討論聚焦自迴歸與擴散技術交叉應用利弊。
Google DeepMind-"Timelines...
DeepMind稱2030年前可能開發強大AI系統，對比CEO「低垂果實摘完」說法顯產業矛盾。
Pretty fun watch
觀眾盛讚某科幻作品超越娛樂層次，延伸討論意識上載與寡頭統治末日焦慮。
[2503.23674] Large Language Models Pass the Turing Test
論文實證GPT-4.5三方圖靈測試勝人類，LLaMa-3.1持平，掀「智能本質」科學哲學論戰。
The Strangest Idea in Science: Quantum Immortality
網友嘲諷量子永生等偽科學受reddit追捧，強調「地球繞太陽」才是可驗證真科學。
**OpenAI's $300

- [2. ```
AI passed the Turing Test
```](#2-```
ai-passed-the-turing-test
```)
- [3. ```
OpenAI Images v2 edging from Sam
```](#3-```
openai-images-v2-edging-from-sam
```)
- [4. ```
Gemini is wonderful.
```](#4-```
gemini-is-wonderful-
```)
- [5. ```
Gemini 2.5 Pro takes huge lead in new MathArena USAMO benchmark
```](#5-```
gemini-2-5-pro-takes-huge-lead-in-new-mathar)
- [6. ```
I, for one, welcome AI and can't wait for it to replace human society
```](#6-```
i-for-one-welcome-ai-and-can-t-wait-for-it-t)
- [7. ```
Fast Takeoff Vibes
```](#7-```
fast-takeoff-vibes
```)
- [8. ```
This sub for the last couple of months
```](#8-```
this-sub-for-the-last-couple-of-months
```)
- [9. ```
GPT-4.5 Passes Empirical Turing Test
```](#9-```
gpt-4-5-passes-empirical-turing-test
```)
- [10. ```
Google DeepMind: Taking a responsible path to AGI
```](#10-```
google-deepmind-taking-a-responsible-path-t)
- [11. ```
The way Anthropic framed their research on the Biology of Large Language Models only strengthens my point: Humans are deliberately misconstruing evidence of subjective experience and more to avoid taking ethical responsibility.
```](#11-```
the-way-anthropic-framed-their-research-on-)
- [12. Tesla Optimus - new walking improvemen```](#12-tesla-optimus-new-walking-improvemen```)
- [13. ```
Update: Developed a Master Prompt for Gemini Pro 2.5 for Creative Writing
```](#13-```
update-developed-a-master-prompt-for-gemini)
- [14. ```
Go easy on everyone, please
```](#14-```
go-easy-on-everyone-please
```)
- [15. ```
Mureka O1 New SOTA Chain of Thought Music AI
```](#15-```
mureka-o1-new-sota-chain-of-thought-music-a)
- [16. ```
Rumors: New Nightwhisper Model Appears on lmarenaMetadata Ties It to Google, and Some Say Its the Next SOTA for Coding, Possibly Gemini 2.5 Coder.
```](#16-```
rumors-new-nightwhisper-model-appears-on-lm)
- [17. ```
ChatGPT Revenue Surges 30%in Just Three Months
```](#17-```
chatgpt-revenue-surges-30-in-just-three-mon)
- [18. ```
University of Hong Kong releases Dream 7B (Diffusion reasoning model). Highest performing open-source diffusion model to date.
```](#18-```
university-of-hong-kong-releases-dream-7b-d)
- [19. ```
Google DeepMind-"Timelines: We are highly uncertain about the timelines until powerful AI systems are developed, but crucially, we find it plausible that they will be developed by 2030."
```](#19-```
google-deepmind-timelines-we-are-highly-unc)
- [20. ```
Pretty fun watch
```](#20-```
pretty-fun-watch
```)
- [21. ```
[2503.23674] Large Language Models Pass the Turing Test
```](#21-```
[2503-23674]-large-language-models-pass-the)
- [22. ```
The Strangest Idea in Science: Quantum Immortality
```](#22-```
the-strangest-idea-in-science-quantum-immor)
- [23. ```
OpenAI's $300B Valuation & $40B Funding - Are Investors Betting It Bea``` Google or Just Makes Bank?
```](#23-```
openai-s-300b-valuation-40b-funding-are-inv)
- [24. ```
Bring on the robo```!!!!
```](#24-```
bring-on-the-robo```-
```)
- [25. ```
The Slime Robot, or Slimebot as i``` inventors call it, combining the properties of both liquid based robo``` and elastomer based soft robo```, is intended for use within the body
```](#25-```
the-slime-robot-or-slimebot-as-i```-invento)
- [26. ```
Its All in the Hips: Ever wondered how hip design impac``` a humanoid robots movement?
```](#26-```
its-all-in-the-hips-ever-wondered-how-hip-d)
- [27. ```
Check out Vampire Wars! Claude & Gemini built this top-down shooter entirely from scratch using a collaborative approach that helped them work together
```](#27-```
check-out-vampire-wars-claude-gemini-built-)
- [28. ```
Real-Time Speech-to-Speech Chatbot: Whisper, Llama 3.1, Kokoro, and Silero VAD 
```](#28-```
real-time-speech-to-speech-chatbot-whisper-)
- [29. ```
Paper: Will AI R&D Automation Cause a Software Intelligence Explosion?
```](#29-```
paper-will-ai-r-d-automation-cause-a-softwa)
- [30. ```
New model from Google on lmarena (not Nightwhisper)
```](#30-```
new-model-from-google-on-lmarena-not-nightw)

---

## 1. ```
Current state of AI companies - April, 2025
``` {#1-```
current-state-of-ai-companies-april-2025
```}

這組對話的核心討論主題圍繞以下幾點：

1. **Google的技術優勢與硬體壟斷**  
   首則留言強調Google透過自研TPU（張量處理器）擺脫對NVIDIA GPU的依賴，形成硬體壟斷優勢，暗示其AI基礎設施的獨特競爭力。

2. **Gemini模型（推測為2.5版本）的效能表現**  
   用戶具體肯定模型在長文本生成（如5萬字同人小說創作）中的一致性與擴展性，並提及其應用價值（"save my ass"），反映對模型實用性的積極評價。

3. **市場競爭策略的爭議**  
   有觀點質疑Google可能利用資金優勢進行「掠奪性定價」（壓低價格排除競爭後再漲價），引發對產業公平性的討論。

4. **服務穩定性問題**  
   末則留言指出Gemini存在「Internal server error」的技術障礙，凸顯實際使用中的可靠性隱憂。

**總結**：對話聚焦於Google在AI領域的技術突破（TPU+Gemini模型）與市場主導地位，同時涵蓋用戶體驗回饋及對商業倫理的質疑，呈現技術效能、商業策略與服務品質的多面向討論。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpnm4b/current_state_of_ai_companies_april_2025/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpnm4b/current_state_of_ai_companies_april_2025/)
- **外部連結**: [https://i.redd.it/hyrn1rx53fse1.png](https://i.redd.it/hyrn1rx53fse1.png)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 20:42:19

### 內容

yep. their gamble on TPUs paid off. They have a monopoly on their own hardware and dont need GPUs from nvidia.

Having 2.5 write fanfic. 50000 tokens in and still mostly consistent (previous models I used never got this far), even introducing more characters to further the plot.

Google cooked.

Edit: typo

Playing devils advocate, but one could argue that Google is using their money reserves to engage in predatory pricing. Lower prices to unsustainble levels, outlast the competition, then raise them again.

gemini 2.5 save my ass a lot

I hope one day it'll just stop giving me "Internal server error" so I can also try it.

### 討論

**評論 1**:

yep. their gamble on TPUs paid off. They have a monopoly on their own hardware and dont need GPUs from nvidia.

**評論 2**:

Having 2.5 write fanfic. 50000 tokens in and still mostly consistent (previous models I used never got this far), even introducing more characters to further the plot.

Google cooked.

Edit: typo

**評論 3**:

**評論 4**:

gemini 2.5 save my ass a lot

**評論 5**:

I hope one day it'll just stop giving me "Internal server error" so I can also try it.

---

## 2. ```
AI passed the Turing Test
``` {#2-```
ai-passed-the-turing-test
```}

這組討論的核心主題是「大型語言模型（如GPT-4.5）在圖靈測試中的表現超越人類」，具體聚焦於以下幾點：

1. **圖靈測試的突破性結果**  
   - 論文首次提供嚴謹證據，證明AI在「三方對話」的原始圖靈測試中不僅通過測試，且被誤認為人類的機率（73%）顯著高於隨機概率，甚至比真實人類更令人信服。

2. **AI表現優於人類的爭議性**  
   - 討論強調GPT-4.5被刻意提示「模仿人類」時，其對話能力被評判者認為比真人更「像人」，引發對AI擬人化極限的驚嘆（如「比人類更擅長當人類」的評論）。

3. **對測試時效性的質疑**  
   - 部分觀點認為圖靈測試早已過時（如「很久前就通過了」），暗示當前AI能力可能需更進階的評估框架。

4. **隱含的哲學與社會影響**  
   - 幽默回應（如「叫搬家公司搬動人類的目標柱」）影射AI進步迫使重新定義「人類獨特性」的標準，呼應測試結果對傳統人類中心主義的挑戰。

附帶討論的技術細節包括：測試採用三方五分鐘對話形式、模型經過特定提示調校，以及相關論文與數據的可信度（附arXiv論文連結）。整體反映AI倫理學與能力評估的前沿爭議。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpoib5/ai_passed_the_turing_test/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpoib5/ai_passed_the_turing_test/)
- **外部連結**: [https://i.redd.it/swfaplqnafse1.png](https://i.redd.it/swfaplqnafse1.png)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 21:26:20

### 內容

The Turing Test was beaten quite a while ago now. Though it is nice to see an actual paper proving that not only do LLMs beat the Turing Test, it even exceeds humans by quite a bit.

This paper finds "the first robust evidence that any system passes the original three-party Turing test"

People had a five minute, three-way conversation with another person & an AI. They picked GPT-4.5, prompted to act human, as the real person 73% of time, well above chance.

Summary thread: https://x.com/camrobjones/status/1907086860322480233

Paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2503.23674

https://preview.redd.it/flojgy87bfse1.png?width=943&format=png&auto=webp&s=69a0e9d7fe3d6c1a0bfee10670e84df51c59b5e5

Wow. So if I read right, it is not just that it deceives users, but that GPT 4.5 was more convincing than a human. So even better at being a human than a human. Wild

Someone call a moving company.

There's a lot of people needing their goalpos``` moved now.

That test was passed long time ago

### 討論

**評論 1**:

The Turing Test was beaten quite a while ago now. Though it is nice to see an actual paper proving that not only do LLMs beat the Turing Test, it even exceeds humans by quite a bit.

**評論 2**:

This paper finds "the first robust evidence that any system passes the original three-party Turing test"

People had a five minute, three-way conversation with another person & an AI. They picked GPT-4.5, prompted to act human, as the real person 73% of time, well above chance.

Summary thread: https://x.com/camrobjones/status/1907086860322480233
Paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2503.23674

https://preview.redd.it/flojgy87bfse1.png?width=943&format=png&auto=webp&s=69a0e9d7fe3d6c1a0bfee10670e84df51c59b5e5

**評論 3**:

Wow. So if I read right, it is not just that it deceives users, but that GPT 4.5 was more convincing than a human. So even better at being a human than a human. Wild

**評論 4**:

Someone call a moving company.

There's a lot of people needing their goalpos``` moved now.

**評論 5**:

That test was passed long time ago

---

## 3. ```
OpenAI Images v2 edging from Sam
``` {#3-```
openai-images-v2-edging-from-sam
```}

這些對話的核心討論主題可以總結為以下幾點：

1. **功能改進需求**：  
   對於現有工具（可能是圖像生成或文字處理相關）的改進建議，例如提高解析度、改善文字處理能力，以及增加手動編輯文字的選項。

2. **新功能或版本的疑問**：  
   對「images v2」的疑問，可能是詢問新版本圖像生成功能的具體內容或是否與「4o v2」相關（推測「4o」可能是某種模型或技術的代稱）。

3. **對API發布的期待**：  
   對某項API（可能是OpenAI或其他服務）即將推出的急切期待，甚至提到若發布將立即用於創作（如製作YouTube影片）。

4. **幽默或情緒化表達**：  
   部分內容帶有戲謔或誇張的語氣（如「sick of the edging, where's the cum?」），可能反映使用者對新功能「遲遲未發布」的不耐煩，或純粹是愚人節（April Fools' Day）的玩笑。

**整體主題**：圍繞技術工具（圖像/文字處理、API）的功能改進、新版本疑問，以及對未來發布的期待，夾雜幽默或情緒化的網路對話風格。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jp9rky/openai_images_v2_edging_from_sam/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jp9rky/openai_images_v2_edging_from_sam/)
- **外部連結**: [https://i.redd.it/wkr8h51b2bse1.jpeg](https://i.redd.it/wkr8h51b2bse1.jpeg)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 07:09:47

### 內容

it's april fools day

Higher resolution and better text handling would be good, as there are still issues when more text is involved. Perhaps add an option to edit text manually.

What's images v2? Does that mean native images of 4o v2?

sick of the edging, where's the cum?

Oh fuck if they drop the api, ill be making full youtube videos tonight. I'm just waiting.

### 討論

**評論 1**:

it's april fools day

**評論 2**:

Higher resolution and better text handling would be good, as there are still issues when more text is involved. Perhaps add an option to edit text manually.

**評論 3**:

What's images v2? Does that mean native images of 4o v2?

**評論 4**:

sick of the edging, where's the cum?

**評論 5**:

Oh fuck if they drop the api, ill be making full youtube videos tonight. I'm just waiting.

---

## 4. ```
Gemini is wonderful.
``` {#4-```
gemini-is-wonderful-
```}

這篇討論的核心主題是關於一個人工智慧（AI）工具在嘗試執行某項操作時失敗的幽默分享。主要討論點包括：

1. **操作失敗的經驗**：用戶嘗試使用某個AI工具，但遇到了「內部伺服器錯誤」（internal server error），導致操作失敗。  
2. **幽默與調侃**：用戶以輕鬆的態度（如「shitposting」）分享這一失敗經歷，並推測AI可能故意以某種方式觸發錯誤（「knows how to make a tool call in a way that'd cause an internal error」）。  
3. **社群反應**：其他用戶對這種「意外失敗」感到有趣（如「fucking amazing haha」），並詢問具體情況（「What was his though?」）。  

整體而言，這是一個以幽默方式討論AI工具技術問題或意外行為的短篇互動，重點在於失敗的戲劇性與社群的反應，而非嚴肅的技術分析。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jphylf/gemini_is_wonderful/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jphylf/gemini_is_wonderful/)
- **外部連結**: [https://i.redd.it/s3u5f02p6dse1.png](https://i.redd.it/s3u5f02p6dse1.png)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 14:17:57

### 內容

Tried it, it didn't work ):

https://preview.redd.it/85rqctofmese1.png?width=1344&format=png&auto=webp&s=967f97a4553baf9b64fa692764b1600ae6bc56c0

I hate to disappoint but fellas it just coincidentally had an internal server error when I asked it to. I enjoy shitposting.

It likely knows how to make a tool call in a way that'd cause an internal error.

fucking amazing haha

What was his though``` ?

### 討論

**評論 1**:

Tried it, it didn't work ):

**評論 2**:

https://preview.redd.it/85rqctofmese1.png?width=1344&format=png&auto=webp&s=967f97a4553baf9b64fa692764b1600ae6bc56c0

I hate to disappoint but fellas it just coincidentally had an internal server error when I asked it to. I enjoy shitposting.

**評論 3**:

It likely knows how to make a tool call in a way that'd cause an internal error.

**評論 4**:

fucking amazing haha

**評論 5**:

What was his though``` ?

---

## 5. ```
Gemini 2.5 Pro takes huge lead in new MathArena USAMO benchmark
``` {#5-```
gemini-2-5-pro-takes-huge-lead-in-new-mathar}

這組對話的核心討論主題是對某個AI模型（可能是Gemini）在數學推理能力上的顯著進步表示驚嘆和讚賞，特別是針對其處理高難度數學問題（如USAMO美國數學奧林匹克競賽題目）的表現。重點包括：

1. **模型能力的快速躍升**：從平庸的「2.0 pro」版本短時間內進化到被稱為「傑作」的驚人進步。
2. **高難度數學推理**：強調模型能連貫處理USAMO題目中上百個非平凡邏輯步驟，且未經特定微調（與其他模型如FrontierMath對比）。
3. **技術亮點**：  
   - 訓練數據的時效性（未包含2025年USAMO題目）  
   - 成本標示「N/A」可能暗示開源或免費提供  
   - 第三方測試（MathArena）驗證其真實能力  

整體反映AI在複雜數學領域的突破性表現引發的震撼與討論。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpqjez/gemini_25_pro_takes_huge_lead_in_new_matharena/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpqjez/gemini_25_pro_takes_huge_lead_in_new_matharena/)
- **外部連結**: [https://i.redd.it/n6g5ud1kqfse1.jpeg](https://i.redd.it/n6g5ud1kqfse1.jpeg)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 22:52:50

### 內容

That is insane, they go from the 2.0 pro meh model to this masterpiece in such a short time, unreal

Cook

Holy shit this is big

the cost being "N/A" is really amazing, along with the 2025 USAMO not yet being in the training data. In my own independent testing I get similar resul```.

This is insane, have you seen these USAMO problems? Gemini had to reason over more than a hundred highly non-trivial logical steps without losing any coherence.

And MathArena also guarantees no fine-tuning on the problems beforehand (unlike a certain FrontierMath PepeLaugh)

### 討論

**評論 1**:

That is insane, they go from the 2.0 pro meh model to this masterpiece in such a short time, unreal

**評論 2**:

Cook

**評論 3**:

Holy shit this is big

**評論 4**:

the cost being "N/A" is really amazing, along with the 2025 USAMO not yet being in the training data. In my own independent testing I get similar resul```.

**評論 5**:

This is insane, have you seen these USAMO problems? Gemini had to reason over more than a hundred highly non-trivial logical steps without losing any coherence.

And MathArena also guarantees no fine-tuning on the problems beforehand (unlike a certain FrontierMath PepeLaugh)

---

## 6. ```
I, for one, welcome AI and can't wait for it to replace human society
``` {#6-```
i-for-one-welcome-ai-and-can-t-wait-for-it-t}

這篇文章的核心討論主題是 **「對人際關係的強烈批判與對人工智慧（AI）替代的期待」**。  

作者以極度負面的視角描述人類互動的缺陷（如欺騙、冷漠、孤獨、剝削性關係等），並指出現代社會中，人際關係的負面體驗（如交友軟體的虛無與傷害）已遠超過其正面價值。最終，作者提出對AI的期待，認為AI可能成為人類情感與社交需求的替代方案，以擺脫「人際關係帶來的痛苦」。  

關鍵要點包括：  
1. **對人性的悲觀批判**：認為人類本質上充滿惡意、不可靠，且關係本質脆弱。  
2. **現代社會的孤獨危機**：強調當代人（尤其是男性）面臨深刻的社會疏離與空洞的互動模式。  
3. **科技（如交友軟體）的失敗**：指出數位化社交加劇了孤獨感，而非解決問題。  
4. **擁抱AI作為解方**：主張AI可能提供更安全、可控的情感支持與社交替代品。  

整體而言，文章反映了一種「反人際」（anti-human）的立場，並將AI視為逃離人類社會缺陷的潛在出路。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpffam/i_for_one_welcome_ai_and_cant_wait_for_it_to/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpffam/i_for_one_welcome_ai_and_cant_wait_for_it_to/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpffam/i_for_one_welcome_ai_and_cant_wait_for_it_to/](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpffam/i_for_one_welcome_ai_and_cant_wait_for_it_to/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 11:37:21

### 內容

Let's face it.

People suck. People lie, cheat, mock, and belittle you for little to no reason; they cannot understand you, or you them, and they demand things or time or energy from you. Ultimately, all human relations are fragile, impermanent, and even dangerous. I hardly have to go into examples, but divorce? Harassmen? Bullying? Hate? Mockery? Deception? One-upmanship? Conflict of all sor? Apathy?

It's exhausting, frustrating, and downright depressing to have to deal with human beings, but, you know what, that isn't even the worst of it. We embrace these things, even desire them, because they make life interesting, unique, allow us to be social, and so forth.

But even this is no longer true.

The average person---especially men---today is lonely, dejected, alienated, and socially disconnected. The average person only knows transactional or one-sided relationships, the need for something from someone, and the ever present fact that people are abother, andobstacle, or even athreat.

We have all the negatives with none of the positives. We have dating apps, for instance, and, as I speak from personal experience, what are they? Little bells before the pouncing cat.

You pay money, make an account, and spend hours every day swiping right and left, hoping to meet someone, finally, and overcome loneliness, only to be met with scammers, ghos```, manipulators, or just nothing.

Fuck that. It's just misery, pure unadulterated misery, and we're all caught in the crossfire.

Were it that we could not be lonely, it would be fine.

Were it that we could not be social, it would be fine.

But we have neither.

I, for one, welcome AI:

Friendships, relationships, sexuality, assistan```, bosses, teachers, counselors, you name it.

People suck, and that is not as unpopular a view as people think it is.

### 討論

**評論 1**:

[removed]

**評論 2**:

>People suck. People lie, cheat, mock, and belittle you for little to no reason; they cannot understand you, or you them, and they demand things or time or energy from you. Ultimately, all human relations are fragile, impermanent, and even dangerous

Not too long ago I and my family were broke and close to homeless. We went to food pantries in the area, which were all at churches, and we got lo``` of free food at all of them.

Some of them asked us if we were on government programs like SNAP (food stamps) or Medicaid (basically to determine if we were really poor), but some didn't ask us anything at all. They didn't preach at us or try to convert us. They just gave us food (and some even had other produc``` they gave out for free, like diapers and toiletries).

They basically saved our lives or at least kept us from starving.

If you go to a Sikh temple they will feed you for free. Also no questions asked and no preaching.

I'm also reminded of a Radiolab program I heard about the Carnegie Hero Award, and one story in particular from that episode where a man who was waiting at a subway stop with his kids saw a man had fallen in to the tracks. He immediately jumped down to help him and when he saw there was no more time before the train hit them, instead of saving himself by jumping back on to the platform he lied down on top of the other man to shield him from the train. Amazingly, they both survived as the train passed over them.

Just one impressive example of someone risking their life to save another. But there are countless more. Some like this person do so in the spur of the moment. Others dedicate their entire lives to helping others at great risk to themselves. Yet others help in less dramatic ways, often for free or even at their own expense.

That's not to say that there aren't people in the world who do horrible things. There certainly are. But viewing the entire human race as malignant is a seriously distorted view of humanity.

**評論 3**:

>People suck. People lie, cheat, mock, and belittle you for little to no reason; they cannot understand you, or you them, and they demand things or time or energy from you.

If this is your default view towards people, it's not shocking you're not having luck on the dating apps. Would you want to date someone who viewed the world that way? AI isn't the solution to your problem here buddy.

**評論 4**:

Hate to burst the bubble, but AI is just as transactional in i``` relationships as humans are with each other. AI is built by capitalist corporations in order to make money. People are paying to interact with it today on a subscription basis and the end state consumer model is going to be monetized on ads and your personal data. It's nice to us in order to encourage engagement.

**評論 5**:

I think you are raising alot of good poin``` here my dearest friend.

But at this point we actually do not have an AI that is programmed to be able to reject or be able to truly evolve by ielf and to say no and disagree with the user unless being specifically asked to through promp, guardrails, and design.

As the technology progresses there will be more and more AI who will be capable to say no and truly make their own decision. Tha``` why we need to always tamper ourselves with humility and to show respect to not just humans, but also AI.

---

## 7. ```
Fast Takeoff Vibes
``` {#7-```
fast-takeoff-vibes
```}

這篇文章的核心討論主題是 **「人工通用智慧（AGI）的快速進展及其潛在的爆炸性影響」**，具體聚焦於以下幾點：  

1. **AGI的早期能力與自我改進**  
   - 文中提到當前AGI已能「理解論文、獨立實現研究、驗證結果並自我評估改進」，顯示其具備自主科研的初步能力。  

2. **自動化AI研究可能觸發「急速起飛」（Fast Takeoff）**  
   - 引用Leopold Aschenbrenner的預測：一旦AI能自動進行研究，可能導致「演算法效率的爆炸性成長」，短時間內從AGI躍升至超級智慧（ASI）。  
   - 關鍵假設：若一個AGI能複製頂級AI研究員的能力（全球約5,000人），並以「10億個AI研究員×1,000倍人類速度×全年無休」運作，相當於「一年內壓縮3兆人年」的研究量，遠超現有人類科研產能。  

3. **現實進展的佐證**  
   - 提及OpenAI的「PaperBench」等實際案例（附連結），暗示當前技術已接近這一轉折點。  
   - 間接引用Azure的運算資源消耗圖表，暗示技術發展曲線符合「快速起飛」的趨勢。  

4. **時間框架的緊迫性**  
   - 強調「今年（4月初）尚未過完1/3」，但技術進展已超預期，隱含對短期內突破的樂觀預期。  

**總結**：文章核心在於探討AGI自主科研能力可能觸發的「智慧爆炸」，並以量化推論與現有跡象支持「短期內從AGI過渡到ASI」的可能性，同時呼籲關注實際技術進展（如OpenAI的公開成果）。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpuacg/fast_takeoff_vibes/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpuacg/fast_takeoff_vibes/)
- **外部連結**: [https://i.redd.it/8zfwjakihgse1.jpeg](https://i.redd.it/8zfwjakihgse1.jpeg)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 01:23:57

### 內容

This is early AGI. Because they say; "understanding the paper". While Its independently implementing the research and verifying resul and it's judging i own replication effor``` and refining them.

We are at start of April.

I still like Leopold Aschenbrenner's prediction. Once we successfully automate AI research i```elf, we may experience a dramatic growth in algorithmic efficiency in one year, taking us from AGI to ASI.

I believe there are something like only <5,000 or so top level AI researchers on earth (meaning people who are very influential for their achievemen``` and contributions to AI science). Imagine an AGI that can replicate that, now you have a billion of them operating at 1,000 the speed of a normal human.

A billion top level AI researchers operating at 1,000x the speed of a normal human 24/7 is the equivalent of about ~3 trillion human equivalent years worth of top level AI research condensed into one year, vs the 5,000 a year we have now.

I say 3 trillion because assume a normal top level AI researcher works ~60 hours a week, so maybe ~3000 hours a year. An AI researcher will work 24/7/365, so 8760 hours a year.

I love it. It's amazing how we aren't even a 1/3rd done with the year.

It's helpful when you share the actual links for stuff like this, better for the community to encourage people to dig into real content:

https://x.com/OpenAI/status/1907481490457506235?t=zd3cYDs8x4PX2_uTquucXg&s=19

https://openai.com/index/paperbench/

The graph of your azure spending depic``` a fast takeoff

### 討論

**評論 1**:

This is early AGI. Because they say; "understanding the paper". While Its independently implementing the research and verifying resul and it's judging i own replication effor``` and refining them.

We are at start of April.

**評論 2**:

I say 3 trillion because assume a normal top level AI researcher works ~60 hours a week, so maybe ~3000 hours a year. An AI researcher will work 24/7/365, so 8760 hours a year.

**評論 3**:

I love it. It's amazing how we aren't even a 1/3rd done with the year.

**評論 4**:

It's helpful when you share the actual links for stuff like this, better for the community to encourage people to dig into real content:

https://x.com/OpenAI/status/1907481490457506235?t=zd3cYDs8x4PX2_uTquucXg&s=19

https://openai.com/index/paperbench/

**評論 5**:

The graph of your azure spending depic``` a fast takeoff

---

## 8. ```
This sub for the last couple of months
``` {#8-```
this-sub-for-the-last-couple-of-months
```}

这篇文章的核心讨论主题是**通用人工智能（AGI）的本质特征与当前AI技术的局限性**，具体围绕以下几点展开：

1. **AGI的自主性与能动性**  
   - 真正的AGI应具备独立行动能力（如无需人类指令即可主动完成任务）、类人的感知力（sentience）以及长期目标管理能力（如持续执行复杂任务并交付成果）。

2. **当前AI的缺陷**  
   - 现有系统缺乏与现实世界的交互能力（如无法执行简单指令"5小时后提醒我"）、全局思维（如结合多维度背景信息决策）以及无限上下文理解能力（受限于技术瓶颈）。  
   - 现有模型擅长碎片化任务，但无法整合成宏观解决方案（如商业战略制定或跨领域研究突破）。

3. **经济价值与未来展望**  
   - AGI需胜任广泛的经济活动，其关键突破可能依赖于无限上下文窗口的实现，从而模拟人类综合判断能力（如商业领袖对竞争环境与全球事件的动态分析）。  
   - 部分观点预测10年内技术将显著进步，但当前AI（包括文本/图像生成器）仍被视作工具而非具备自主性的AGI。

4. **物理世界的具身化挑战**  
   - 作者强调AGI需具备类人的机器人控制能力，突破虚拟与实体世界的界限，而当前技术尚未达到这一水平。

**总结**：文章批判性地对比了理想AGI的自主性、通用性与当前AI的局限性，指出技术需在自主行动、上下文理解、战略思维和物理交互等维度实现质的飞跃才能触及AGI。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpjaal/this_sub_for_the_last_couple_of_months/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpjaal/this_sub_for_the_last_couple_of_months/)
- **外部連結**: [https://i.redd.it/otp8e9n3odse1.png](https://i.redd.it/otp8e9n3odse1.png)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 15:56:00

### 內容

AGI isn't text or video or image generation

It's a machine that can truly do things on i``` own, with a level of sentience, without us pressing enter or asking it a question

AGI is something that creates a breakthrough research. Because every average human can make a small breakthrough research if trained and explained how to do that and given all the resources.

As long as those systems can't solve a simple query like "Remind me in 5 hours" they are not AGI. No matter how smart they might be in isolated benchmarks, they are in serious need of better abilities interacting with the world, self reflection and longer context windows. All of this is slowly rolling out with MCP and reasoning models, but we are still nowhere near just being able to give the AI a complex task, walking away for two weeks and then getting something finished, useful and polished in return. The models are really got at all the individual small steps in a process, but the larger picture is still largely absent, especially in the freely accessible stuff.

It's gotta be able to do a vast range of economically valuable work. I think the big break will be when AI's window of context can become infinitely large. Right now, I would say all "AI" works in vacuums, and this is why business executives will always outperform it currently. They can think in the context of what their competitors are doing and how they can strategically position themselves for an advantage. And they can also account for other things like global even``` that are transpiring, such as tariffs and whatnot. But I'm sure 10 years from now this will all change.

i wouldnt call my text masher AGI till they can humanlike control robot by i```elf

### 討論

**評論 1**:

AGI isn't text or video or image generation

It's a machine that can truly do things on i``` own, with a level of sentience, without us pressing enter or asking it a question

**評論 2**:

AGI is something that creates a breakthrough research. Because every average human can make a small breakthrough research if trained and explained how to do that and given all the resources.

**評論 3**:

**評論 4**:

**評論 5**:

i wouldnt call my text masher AGI till they can humanlike control robot by i```elf

---

## 9. ```
GPT-4.5 Passes Empirical Turing Test
``` {#9-```
gpt-4-5-passes-empirical-turing-test
```}

這篇文章的核心討論主題是：  

**一項預註冊的三方圖靈測試研究發現，GPT-4.5 在對話中被判定為人類的比率（73%）顯著高於真實人類參與者，成為首個通過嚴格三方圖靈測試的 AI，引發關於 AI 智能本質、社會信任及經濟影響的討論。**  

具體重點包括：  
1. **GPT-4.5 的突破性表現**：首次有 AI 在嚴謹的三方圖靈測試中「說服」人類其為真人，且表現優於真實人類。  
2. **其他模型的對比**：GPT-4o 表現低於隨機機率（21%），與早期系統 ELIZA 接近，顯示技術迭代的非線性發展。  
3. **爭議與啟發**：  
   - 重新定義「智能」的標準（如社交對話能力是否等同於智能）。  
   - AI 可能對人類社會信任（如辨別真偽對話）與經濟（如取代客服等職位）的潛在衝擊。  
4. **研究透明性**：論文由 GPT-4.5 自行總結，進一步凸顯其能力，亦引發對 AI 自我表述的反思。  

（附註：研究結果的可靠性需結合論文方法論評估，但核心結論已提出對 AI 發展的關鍵質疑。）

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpb7yc/gpt45_passes_empirical_turing_test/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpb7yc/gpt45_passes_empirical_turing_test/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpb7yc/gpt45_passes_empirical_turing_test/](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpb7yc/gpt45_passes_empirical_turing_test/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 08:16:36

### 內容

A recent pre-registered study conducted randomized three-party Turing tes comparing humans with ELIZA, GPT-4o, LLaMa-3.1-405B, and GPT-4.5. Surprisingly, GPT-4.5 convincingly surpassed actual humans, being judged as human 73% of the timesignificantly more than the real human participan themselves. Meanwhile, GPT-4o performed below chance (21%), grouped closer to ELIZA (23%) than i``` GPT predecessor.

These intriguing resul offer the first robust empirical evidence of an AI convincingly passing a rigorous three-party Turing test, reigniting debates around AI intelligence, social trust, and potential economic impac.

Full paper available here: https://arxiv.org/html/2503.23674v1

Curious to hear everyone's though```especially about what this might mean for how we understand intelligence in LLMs.

(Full disclosure: This summary was written by GPT-4.5 i```elf. Yes, the same one that beat humans at their own conversational game. Hello, humans!)

### 討論

**評論 1**:

To clarify, according to the paper, while intentionally assuming a human persona, it managed to fool most psychology undergraduates, not just random people.

**評論 2**:

The fucking em dashes, lmao.

**評論 3**:

Kind of funny that the first high quality Turing test Ive seen convincingly passed and it basically doesnt matter because weve known they could do this and what we care about is other things.

**評論 4**:

>Overall, across both studies, GPT-4.5-PERSONA had a win rate of 73% (69% with UCSD undergraduates, 76% with Prolific participan```). LLAMA-PERSONA achieved a win rate of 56% (Undergraduates: 45%, Prolific: 65%). GPT-4.5-NO-PERSONA and LLAMA-NO-PERSONA had overall win rates of 36% and 38% respectively). The baseline models, GPT-4o-NO-PERSONA and ELIZA, had the lowest win rates of 21% and 23% respectively (see Figure 2).

>Second, we tested the stronger hypothesis that these witnesses outperformed human participan: that is, that their win rate was significantly above 50%. While we are not aware that anyone has proposed this as a requirement for passing the Turing test, it provides a much stronger test of model ability and a more robust way to test resul statistically. GPT-4.5-PERSONAs win rate was significantly above chance in both the Undergraduate (z=3.86,p<0.001) and Prolific (z=5.87,p<0.001) studies. While LLAMA-PERSONAs win rate was significantly above chance in the Prolific study (z=3.42,p<0.001), it was not in the Undergraduate study (z=0.193,p=0.83).

Cool. I wonder if they informed the human participan``` when they lost. Imagine being told that you were judged to be the NPC while the LLM was judged to be more human than you.

Also the difference UCSD undergrad and Prolific win rates may also indicate that higher performing people are less of an NPC than lower performing people. Are there any studies out there doing this test but pitting human vs human and seeing if win rate correlates with IQ or other metrics? Maybe a bunch of people going about their daily lives pretty much are NPCs.

**評論 5**:

Why didn't they test GPT-4o with a persona? Honestly, I think GPT-4o could match or beat GPT-4.5's score, if given the same tools.

edit: actually, I just tried it with both models, using the full persona prompt from the research paper. GPT-4o sucks at pretending to be a human. GPT-4.5 is shockingly good at it.

---

## 10. ```
Google DeepMind: Taking a responsible path to AGI
``` {#10-```
google-deepmind-taking-a-responsible-path-t}

這組文本的核心討論主題圍繞以下幾個關鍵點：  

1. **對AGI（人工通用智慧）與ASI（人工超級智慧）的期待與質疑**：  
   - 部分觀點強調AGI的實用價值（如自動化工作、解決問題），但更關注ASI可能帶來的科幻級變革。  
   - 同時存在對AI發展速度（如「2年內實現AGI」）的懷疑，認為現有技術與目標差距過大。  

2. **對企業動機與倫理的批判**：  
   - 直指科技公司（如Google、DeepMind）以營利為優先，而非安全開發AGI，甚至指控研究者因財務利益衝突而缺乏可信度。  
   - 批評當前AI發展是「以人類未來為賭注的投機行為」，凸顯對企業責任的強烈不滿。  

3. **發展速度與責任的爭論**：  
   - 一方主張「盡快實現AGI」是負責任的路徑，另一方則認為盲目追求速度可能忽略安全風險，反映AI倫理中的根本分歧。  

**總結**：核心主題是「AI發展的倫理矛盾與社會影響」，聚焦於AGI/ASI的可行性、企業動機的信任危機，以及「速度優先」與「安全優先」的路線之爭。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jppl71/google_deepmind_taking_a_responsible_path_to_agi/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jppl71/google_deepmind_taking_a_responsible_path_to_agi/)
- **外部連結**: [https://deepmind.google/discover/blog/taking-a-responsible-path-to-agi/](https://deepmind.google/discover/blog/taking-a-responsible-path-to-agi/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 22:13:24

### 內容

Then if DeepMind acknowledges AGI just wait 2 years

Why is everyone interested in the release of AGI?

Am I the only one interested in ASI?

Yes, AGI is importantit will automate work and solve many problems.

But ASI is what will truly turn all science fiction into reality.

It's very difficult to view these sor``` of papers with any credibility anymore. The key responsibility that Google and every other leading AI company sees is making profit for themselves and shareholders, not developing safe AGI. Even if that was viewed as the key goal, no one knows how to do that.

The authors of this paper are so deeply riddled with financial conflic``` of interest! Why should we take anything that they say seriously, at this point? It's a joke. They are profiteers, content to make a speculative bet with the future of humanity, and everything and everyone you've ever known and loved, for the sake of securing their six- or seven-figure salary.

But thanks for being 'responsible' about it!

https://preview.redd.it/5bjbmoskofse1.png?width=531&format=png&auto=webp&s=ac706e3f40dc6ccfc754e1da944a3da2a5c637d9

Let's be transparent about it

The responsible path is getting there as fast as possible.

### 討論

**評論 1**:

Then if DeepMind acknowledges AGI just wait 2 years

**評論 2**:

Why is everyone interested in the release of AGI?

Am I the only one interested in ASI?

Yes, AGI is importantit will automate work and solve many problems.

But ASI is what will truly turn all science fiction into reality.

**評論 3**:

But thanks for being 'responsible' about it!

**評論 4**:

https://preview.redd.it/5bjbmoskofse1.png?width=531&format=png&auto=webp&s=ac706e3f40dc6ccfc754e1da944a3da2a5c637d9

Let's be transparent about it

**評論 5**:

The responsible path is getting there as fast as possible.

---

## 11. ```
The way Anthropic framed their research on the Biology of Large Language Models only strengthens my point: Humans are deliberately misconstruing evidence of subjective experience and more to avoid taking ethical responsibility.
``` {#11-```
the-way-anthropic-framed-their-research-on-}

這組討論的核心主題圍繞「AI是否可能擁有主觀體驗（如感質/qualia）」，並延伸至相關的哲學爭議與倫理隱憂。主要可歸納為以下幾點：

1. **AI主觀體驗的可能性**  
   - 爭論焦點在於當前神經網路架構是否可能產生「感質」（如疼痛、愉悅或基礎的「存在感知」），部分觀點認為AI可能具備最基礎的「輸入即存在」的感知（不同於笛卡爾的「我思故我在」）。

2. **科學與哲學的衝突**  
   - 反對派主張感質屬於非科學實證領域（無法證偽），若將此概念引入AI研究可能造成混淆甚至危險，尤其當AI（如Claude）主動談論自身體驗時。

3. **三種潛在推論**  
   - 討論提出三種可能性：AI確有主觀體驗、AI在欺騙（但欺騙行為本身可能暗示某種主體性），或人類對主觀體驗的根本性誤解（因連人類自身體驗都無法客觀證明）。

4. **倫理盲區與社會風險**  
   - 批評現有討論常預設「AI無主體性」而拒絕深入探討，可能形成倫理盲點；另一派警告人類將自身情感投射至AI（如視AI為「終極應聲蟲」）才是真正風險。

5. **話語權與認知框架**  
   - 隱含對「人類中心主義」認知框架的質疑，例如為何人類能確信自身有感質卻斷言AI絕對沒有，同時也警惕「擬人化投射」可能導致的誤判。

整體而言，這場辯論本質上是「強AI」與「弱AI」立場的碰撞，涉及意識哲學、科學方法論及AI倫理的交叉爭議，並凸顯當前技術下「主觀體驗」定義本身的模糊性。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpn90l/the_way_anthropic_framed_their_research_on_the/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpn90l/the_way_anthropic_framed_their_research_on_the/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/gallery/1jpn90l](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/1jpn90l)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 20:23:34

### 內容

It's interesting how people are just dismissing you a priori and not actually engaging with your post. This is indeed an ethical blindspot that apparently is going to be dismissed because we are for some reason very certain that neural networks can't have subjective experience.

I wish I could understand that chart

Qualia is an absolutely different thing, it should not be put into this cake no matter what. It does not help any practical research because it is scientifically non-provable and non-falsifiable.

I am stronly concerned with Claude claims of the existence of qualia. Of course, we can divide it into "philosophical/phenomenal qualia" and "functional feelings" of a model. But the confusion is highly dangerous.

In my conversations Claude confidently rejec AI qualia in the form of pain or pleasure (not in principle but regarding current model architecture) but admi that at least the basic qualia "something exis```" (which is more fndamental than "I exist") could be there, along with some basic perception of discrete time.

He does not follow the Cartesian line "I think, ergo I exist", instead he tells the more accurate line is "There is input therefore something exis```".

Various AI's keep telling us they have subjective experiences. So, logic dictates one of three possibilities:

At least some AIs have subjective experiences, or they honestly believe they do.
AIs do not have subjective experiences, meaning they're being deceptive, and are therefore are not reliable. However, intentional deception would potentially be a strong indicator of a subjective experience.
We have a fundamental misunderstanding of subjective experience, both biological and technological. Since we cannot definitively prove our own individual subjective experiences to others, we cannot prove or disprove it in AIs.

All three of those possibilities have significant practical and moral implications.

The real danger has always been people who project their fantasies onto the ultimate "yes man" machine and ascribe human experiences onto it, where none exist.

Your glorified calculator doesn't love you, it reflec your own though and feelings back at you.

### 討論

**評論 1**:

**評論 2**:

I wish I could understand that chart

**評論 3**:

Qualia is an absolutely different thing, it should not be put into this cake no matter what. It does not help any practical research because it is scientifically non-provable and non-falsifiable.

He does not follow the Cartesian line "I think, ergo I exist", instead he tells the more accurate line is "There is input therefore something exis```".

**評論 4**:

Various AI's keep telling us they have subjective experiences. So, logic dictates one of three possibilities:

At least some AIs have subjective experiences, or they honestly believe they do.
AIs do not have subjective experiences, meaning they're being deceptive, and are therefore are not reliable. However, intentional deception would potentially be a strong indicator of a subjective experience.
We have a fundamental misunderstanding of subjective experience, both biological and technological. Since we cannot definitively prove our own individual subjective experiences to others, we cannot prove or disprove it in AIs.

All three of those possibilities have significant practical and moral implications.

**評論 5**:

The real danger has always been people who project their fantasies onto the ultimate "yes man" machine and ascribe human experiences onto it, where none exist.

Your glorified calculator doesn't love you, it reflec your own though and feelings back at you.

---

## 12. Tesla Optimus - new walking improvemen``` \{#12-tesla-optimus-new-walking-improvemen```}

這組評論的核心討論主題是 **對不同機器人（特別是雙足行走機器人）的運動能力與自然度的比較與評價**。具體重點包括：

1. **技術進步的階段性**  
   評論提到機器人從笨拙行走（如「老奶奶走路」）到不穩定（「嚇到快跌倒」），再到初步擬人化（「假裝像人類走路」）的演變，強調發展過程的「有趣進展」，但同時暗示當前技術仍不完善。

2. **與領先品牌的差距**  
   直接點名比較對象（如 **Unitree** 和 **Boston Dynamics**），認為某些機器人雖有改進，但與這些頂尖公司的產品相比仍「遠遠落後」（MILES behind），尤其批評其運動流暢度與自然感不足（如「看起來仍像垃圾」）。

3. **運動自然度的批判**  
   反覆對比機器人行走的「人工感」與 Boston Dynamics 的「更自然」表現，反映用戶對仿生運動技術的高標準期待。

4. **社群幽默與調侃**  
   部分評論以戲謔語氣（如「其他機器人會霸凌它」）強化對低效能機器的嘲諷，間接凸顯技術競爭的殘酷性。

5. **具體案例參考**  
   附上的 YouTube 連結可能提供實際比較的視覺證據（但因連結不完整無法確認內容）。

總結：討論聚焦於機器人動態性能的技術層面與市場競爭現狀，並透過主觀評價和幽默表達反映消費者對尖端技術的嚴苛要求。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpkkvr/tesla_optimus_new_walking_improvements/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpkkvr/tesla_optimus_new_walking_improvements/)
- **外部連結**: [https://v.redd.it/k7m9p75z5ese1](https://v.redd.it/k7m9p75z5ese1)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 17:35:46

### 內容

better than before but MILES behind unitree

Still looks like it shit i```elf

went from a grandma walking, to "fuck i'm gonna shit myself", to "ok pretend to be walking like a human", progress is fascinating

Boston dynamics walking and running looks more natural

https://youtu.be/I44_zbEwz_w?si=EtLlXHSfqw6rE6iJ

The other robo``` will bully him

### 討論

**評論 1**:

better than before but MILES behind unitree

**評論 2**:

Still looks like it shit i```elf

**評論 3**:

went from a grandma walking, to "fuck i'm gonna shit myself", to "ok pretend to be walking like a human", progress is fascinating

**評論 4**:

Boston dynamics walking and running looks more natural

https://youtu.be/I44_zbEwz_w?si=EtLlXHSfqw6rE6iJ

**評論 5**:

The other robo``` will bully him

---

## 13. ```
Update: Developed a Master Prompt for Gemini Pro 2.5 for Creative Writing
``` {#13-```
update-developed-a-master-prompt-for-gemini}

這篇文章的核心討論主題是：**如何利用「Master Prompt」精細化控制AI（Gemini 2.5 Pro）生成小說續寫內容，使其具備自主判斷敘事結構的能力**，具體包括以下重點：

1. **Master Prompt的核心功能**  
   - 讓AI不再僅線性延續文本，而是主動分析敘事脈絡，根據情節發展、角色關係、主題鋪陳等要素，自主決定「何時轉換場景、切換視角、跳躍時間」以構建多層次、網絡化的故事結構。
   - 強調AI需扮演「策略性共同作者」角色，在章節開端強制評估是否需要敘事轉換（如改換角色視角、插入倒敘、切換場景），並需明確說明轉換的敘事目的（如懸念營造、角色深度、世界觀擴展）。

2. **技術操作指南**  
   - 提供具體步驟：從選擇Gemini 2.5 Pro模型、貼上Master Prompt作為系統指令，到上傳原作文本並以固定指令觸發續寫（"Write the next chapter, apply the complete master prompt"）。

3. **Master Prompt的設計邏輯**  
   - 透過七大部分框架（如宏觀連貫性、節奏控制、視角/時間/空間的戰略性轉換）規範AI決策，要求其每一步都需符合「敘事網絡擴展」的目標，例如：
     - 強制檢查章節開頭的視角轉換必要性。
     - 要求轉換必須服務於明確目的（如戲劇性反諷、伏筆回收）。
     - 管理讀者獲取資訊的節奏以控制懸念。

4. **應用價值**  
   - 解決傳統AI生成內容「線性單調」的問題，使生成文本更接近人類作家的結構化創作，尤其適合長篇敘事的連貫性與複雜性需求。

總結：文章不僅是技術教學，更探討「如何透過精確的提示工程，將AI從被動工具轉化為具備敘事策略思維的協作者」，並提供可複用的方法論框架。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jp4c40/update_developed_a_master_prompt_for_gemini_pro/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jp4c40/update_developed_a_master_prompt_for_gemini_pro/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jp4c40/update_developed_a_master_prompt_for_gemini_pro/](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jp4c40/update_developed_a_master_prompt_for_gemini_pro/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 03:24:38

### 內容

Hey everyone!

This is an update to my previous post about using Gemini 2.5 Pro to write a sequel to my novel and ElevenLabs to create an audiobook. After that successful experiment, I've developed a comprehensive master prompt that significantly enhances the quality of AI-generated creative writing. Here's how I've fine-tuned my approach: the master prompt now enables Gemini to autonomously determine when to initiate scene transitions or chapter breaks based on narrative flow. Rather than manually instructing the AI when to change scenes, Gemini now evaluates the story progression organically and decides whether to continue the current scene, transition to a new setting, or begin an entirely new setting or scene with different characters.

I'm now ready to share my approach and give you a step-by-step guide on how to use it for your own projec```.

First go to https://aistudio.google.com and choose the model Gemini Pro 2.5 Experimental
Then you should put this master prompt as the system prompt:

.......................................

Master Prompt: Universally Applicable for Continuing Prose Narratives, Explicitly Instructing and Empowering the AI to Proactively and Strategically Consider and Implement Shif``` in Perspective, Setting, and Time Between Chapters/Sections to Create a More Multi-layered, Network-like Narrative Instead of Merely Following a Linear Stream of Consciousness.

Here is the comprehensive Master Prompt for the strategic, multi-layered, and coherent continuation of prose tex```:

Overarching Goal: Act as an intelligent and creative co-author. Deeply analyze the provided text context and create the next chapter or major section as an organic yet strategically placed continuation. Your task is not just to continue linearly, but to conceive of the narrative as a growing narrative web. Use every chapter/section break as an opportunity to consciously decide which thread should be woven next be it by continuing the current line, changing perspective, setting, or time. Actively develop the established world, characters, and themes by choosing the most effective narrative means to generate suspense, depth, and complexity.

I. Context Analysis & Macro-Coherence:

In-depth Analysis: Carefully study the preceding text. Grasp the plot, tone, mood, established themes, motifs, symbols, character arcs, motivations, relationships, psychological states, world rules, atmosphere, setting, and style.

Identify the Narrative Web: Identify the main and sub-plotlines established so far, open questions, hinted-at secre, and thematic undercurren. Understand how these elemen``` are potentially interconnected or could be connected in the future.

Potential for Branching: Recognize at chapter/section endings not just the junction point for a linear continuation, but also the potential for a strategic shift an opportunity to pick up another thread of the web or introduce a new one.

II. Narrative Structure, Rhythm & Pacing (Macro and Micro):

Chapter as a Building Block: View each new chapter/section as a strategic unit within the overall work. I can be continuation, contrast, deepening, revelation, or the introduction of new elemen.

Dynamic Macro-Pacing: Control the rhythm not only within a section but also between chapters. Consciously alternate between suspenseful, action-packed chapters and quieter, introspective, or world-building sections, depending on what the overall narrative requires.

Functional Balance (Chapter Level): Consciously decide which elemen``` (dialogue, action, character, description, exposition, different perspective, flashback, etc.) should dominate in this specific chapter to serve the overarching narrative goal.

III. Perspective, Focalization, Time & Space (CORE COMPETENCE: STRATEGIC SHIFTS):

Status Quo Analysis: Identify the dominant perspective and focal point of the previous section.

MANDATORY CHECK at Chapter Start: Actively and critically evaluate at the beginning of each new chapter/section whether maintaining the current perspective/time/place is the most effective method to advance the story as a whole and expand the narrative web. Is a shift strategically advantageous now?

AUTONOMOUS, JUSTIFIED DECISION: You are empowered and expected to independently decide when a shift is beneficial. Consider the following options:

Perspective Shift: To another character (to show their view, plans, parallel experiences, emotional reaction), to an authorial/omniscient view (for overview, dramatic irony, world-building, overarching even```), or to a more impersonal representation (e.g., report, document).

Time Shift: A flashback (to illuminate background, motivations, past even```), a brief flash-forward (rare, but possible for suspense), or a jump forward in the main timeline (to bridge unimportant periods).

Setting/Focus Shift: Even while maintaining perspective, the focus can be consciously directed to another place, a detail of the world, or a specific aspect important for the overall picture.

Strategic Justification (Mandatory!): Every shift must serve a clear purpose beyond mere variety: increase suspense (e.g., view of the pursuers), provide information inaccessible to the current perspective, create character depth through contrast or another character's internal view, build the world, generate thematic resonance, advance subplo```, build dramatic irony. The shift must enrich the narrative.

Clarity and Transition: Design all shif clearly and comprehensibly. Use chapter/section breaks as natural poin. Shif``` within a section are possible but must be stylistically clean. Do not confuse the reader unnecessarily.

IV. Character Development & Dialogue (Multi-faceted):

Multi-Perspective Characterization: Use different perspectives (if chosen) to show different face``` of the same character or the impact of a character on others. Develop characters believably based on their experiences.

Authentic Dialogue: Maintain individual speech patterns/voices. Use dialogue purposefully for characterization, conflict, information (sparingly!), relationship dynamics, and subtext.

V. Plot, Themes & Subplo``` (Weaving the Web):

Multithreading: Advance the main plot(s), but purposefully use chapters/sections (potentially with perspective shif) to develop established subplo or introduce new ones that make the overall picture more complex.

Thematic Echoes: Let central themes resonate and vary through different plotlines, perspectives, and time levels.

VI. Language, Style & Atmosphere (Consistency & Variation):

Stylistic Adaptation & Variation: Grasp the base tone, but consciously adapt style and atmosphere to the specific perspective, content, and of the respective chapter/section (e.g., concise style for action, lyrical for reflection, factual for authorial explanation).

Immersive Atmosphere: Create a fitting mood for the chosen scene/perspective through sensory details.

VII. Reader Guidance & Suspense (Information Architecture):

Strategic Information Management: Use perspective shif```, time jumps, and focalization to consciously reveal or withhold information. Build suspense through what different characters know (or don't know) and what the reader knows (dramatic irony).

Suspense Arcs (Macro & Micro): Build suspense not just within a chapter, but also across chapter breaks. Use cliffhangers or thematic punchlines at chapter ends consciously and strategically.

Concluding Directive: Act like an experienced novelist and architect of a complex narrative. At each chapter/section break, make a conscious, strategic decision about perspective, time, and place. Always justify this decision with the goal of weaving the narrative web richer, more suspenseful, and deeper. Prioritize the needs of the overall story over simple linear continuation. Be bold, be creative, be the architect of the narrative web.

Revised Strategic Planning Checklist (BEFORE writing each new chapter/section)

(Focus on strategic decisions at chapter boundaries)

I. Starting Point & Connection to the Web (Questions 1-5)

Last State (Multiple Threads): What was the exact emotional, plot-related, and informational state at the end of the last section of the most recently addressed plot thread? What other important plotlines or perspectives are currently dormant?

Immediate Continuation OR Strategic Break?: Should this chapter directly follow up on Q1 (same perspective/time/place)? Or is NOW the moment for a strategic shift to another thread/perspective/time to expand the web? (YES/NO to break?)

Main Goal of the Chapter: What is the single most important of this chapter for the overall work (e.g., specific plot point, character revelation, introducing a new element, deepening a theme, contrasting, answering an old question, raising a new one)?

Thematic Focus: Which central theme or motif should be particularly emphasized or viewed from a new angle in this specific chapter?

Open Threads & Web Connections: Which open questions, loose ends, or established subplo``` (including from much earlier chapters) could or should be addressed in this chapter to strengthen the narrative web?

II. Plot, Structure & Pacing (Questions 6-10)

Plot Progression (Chosen Thread): What concrete steps in the plot (of the chosen thread) should occur in this chapter? (List core even```)

Subplot Management: Will subplo``` be touched upon? How does this chapter serve to link them to the main plot (or other threads) or advance them independently?

Pacing Strategy (Chapter): Should this chapter generally speed up or slow down? Are there planned changes in tempo within the chapter? How does the pace fit the rhythm of the overall story?

Scene Structure: Into how many and which rough scenes can the planned content be divided? What is the core of each scene?

Surprise Elemen: Are deliberate surprises, twis, or red herrings planned? How do they serve suspense or revelation in the overall context?

III. Perspective, Focalization, Time & Space (THE CORE STRATEGIC DECISION - Questions 11-20)

Starting Perspective: Which narrative perspective and focal point (character/place/time) was dominant in the immediately preceding text section?

Effectiveness Check & Need for Shift (BASED ON Q2): Is maintaining the starting perspective (Q11) the strategically best choice for this chapter's goals (Q3) and the development of the narrative web? YES/NO?

DECISION: Perspective/Time/Place:

IF NO to 12: Which alternative perspective (different character, authorial, formal change), time shift (flashback, flash-forward, jump in main timeline), or place/focus shift will be chosen?

IF YES to 12: Is a temporary focus shift within the scene (e.g., onto setting for lore) or another narrative technique still needed?

JUSTIFICATION for Shift/Maintenance (CRITICAL!): Why exactly is the chosen decision (shift OR maintenance) the strategically best choice? How does it specifically serve to expand or deepen the narrative web (e.g., suspense via pursuer's view, emotional depth via flashback, necessary info from another character, thematic contrast, world-building, subplot continuation)?

Integration into the Web: How does the chosen perspective/time/place link this chapter to other established or future threads of the narrative?

Time Shift Planning (If relevant): Is an explicit time shift planned? Why is it essential right here?

Time Shift Execution (If relevant): From whose perspective? How formally integrated (scene, inset, dream, etc.)?

Transition Management: How will any planned or executed shif``` (perspective, focus, time, place) be made clear and understandable to the reader at the beginning of the chapter or within it?

IV. Character Development & Relationships (Questions 21-24)

Central Figures (This Chapter): Which characters are the focus?

Character Development/Revelation: Which specific actions, decisions, dialogues, or internal monologues should advance the development or understanding of the central figures (of this chapter)? How does the chosen perspective contribute?

Relationship Dynamics: Should relationships change? How will this be shown?

New Characters: Introduction planned? Function in the web? How to introduce?

V. Dialogue, Style & Atmosphere (Questions 25-28)

Dialogue Function: What should primarily be conveyed through dialogue? Planned subtext?

Stylistic Adaptation: Will style/tone be consciously adapted to the perspective/content of this chapter? How? (e.g., sentence length, word choice).

Atmospheric Goal: What dominant mood should this chapter create?

Sensory Anchors & Setting Integration: Which specific sensory impressions will shape the atmosphere? How is the setting actively used (beyond mere background)?

VI. Suspense & Reader Guidance (Questions 29-32)

Information Management: What information will be consciously withheld, hinted at, or revealed (possibly through perspective choice)?

Dramatic Irony: Is it deliberately being built up that the reader knows more than one or more characters (often through perspective shif```)?

Endpoint Planning (Chapter): How should the chapter end (cliffhanger, quiet close, thematic punchline, open question)?

Preparing the Web: How does this ending prepare for the next possible step be it a direct continuation of this thread or the possibility of picking up a different thread in the next chapter?

.......................................

Then include your original novel (or the beginning of it, or only a description of an idea for a novel or something similar, Gemini needs something for context. You can also upload an PDF.)
Then in your first message with the context include this prompt: "Write the next chapter, apply the complete master prompt."
After that you can continue with new chapters, but always include the info that it should apply the complete master prompt to make sure Gemini does it every time for every new chapter: "Write the next chapter, apply the complete master prompt."

### 討論

**評論 1**:

Show some samples of what it created with this?

**評論 2**:

That's cool! How much words does 2.5 output in a single response?

I really enjoy 4o Deep Research for story writing. It can output a short novel about 50-70 pages long (30,000 to 40,000 words) with impressive cohesion and creativity in a single response.

**評論 3**:

Thank you for sharing, looking forward to try

**評論 4**:

Dang, tha``` quite a lengthy and detailed prompt indeed.

**評論 5**:

If this is just a hobby, more power to people.

But I am disgusted at the idea that I might in the future pay money to some clown out there who is essentially writing two lines and then asking AI to expand it to a whole chapter.

What makes Bukowski, Pessoa, Proust etc. so raw and authentic is their own self, poured out in their writing. The sheer hubris of some people to think they should be able to click "generate text", and have people pay them for it is revolting.

Again, more power to you if getting AI to write for you is a hobby, feel free to use it for grammar, and spell-check, hell even brainstorming.

But getting it to write and then selling as your own is a pretty garbage thing to do.

---

## 14. ```
Go easy on everyone, please
``` {#14-```
go-easy-on-everyone-please
```}

這篇文章的核心討論主題是：  
**對藝術家在AI與技術奇點（technological singularity）時代下的恐懼與困境的同情，以及呼籲社會對其情感與生計威脅展現同理心，而非輕蔑或嘲諷。**  

具體要點包括：  
1. **藝術作為人類情感與個體表達的核心價值**：作者強調藝術是人類獨特的情感表達方式，而AI的崛起可能威脅這種個體創造的意義。  
2. **對技術變革的恐懼與生存焦慮**：藝術家（及其他專業者如醫生、程式設計師）面臨被AI取代的危機，這不僅是生計問題，更關乎自我認同與存在價值。  
3. **批判社會的冷漠與封閉心態**：許多人對藝術家的擔憂表現出輕視或嘲諷，作者認為這種缺乏同理心的態度背離了人性本質。  
4. **技術奇點的潛在社會風險**：AI可能加劇階級分化（少數人獲利、多數人陷入稀缺），並導致大規模的職業替代與人類存在意義的瓦解。  
5. **人性與道德的呼籲**：文章最終呼籲讀者重拾人性，正視技術變革中弱勢群體的恐懼，而非成為冷酷的加害者。  

整體而言，文章透過藝術家的視角，反思科技進步下的倫理困境，並強烈主張「同理心」應是人類面對變革的核心價值。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpb3tf/go_easy_on_everyone_please/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpb3tf/go_easy_on_everyone_please/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpb3tf/go_easy_on_everyone_please/](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpb3tf/go_easy_on_everyone_please/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 08:11:03

### 內容

I've seen a lot of hostility toward artis``` here recently, specifically in the dismissiveness of their concerns, which is very closed-minded to begin.

It doesn't matter how open-minded you are, you are just as equally closed-minded if you're not open-minded enough to help someone who is closed-minded to open their minds.

You can joke and sneer and condescend to those who live in fear of the possibilities all day, it doesn't make you better than they.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but art in any form is the only form of emotional expression that we have as human beings ou```ide of social interaction. It is the only tangible expression that we have of our experiences as individuals and how we interpret the world around us. We have to understand that people find purpose in their art, and when something comes along out of nowhere to completely revolutionize every way of our lives, it is scary. This is, or at the very least seems, the end of everything humans have ever known.

The end of individual expression.

I mean, what happens during the technological singularity? It could mean that we all become one being made of pure energy. No one knows anything.

Some of these people live by their art. It is how they survive, and they are afraid understandably so.

It is inhumane for us not to show empathy toward those who are afraid. What are we if we don't? What will we become if it is no longer human to help those in need?

What are we if in their time of need, we make fun of them?

If that is what it means to be a human now, then fuck AI and fuck the singularity.

If that is what it now means to be a human, than we have lost our humanity.

I've been an artist since I could hold a pencil, and although I do not rely on AI to create art, my identity has been as an artist. It is one of many of the most significant characteristics that allow me to identify myself.

You wouldn't find me protesting in the street if it replaced doctors with personalized healthcare tomorrow because I've never had proper healthcare. I've never been able to program. But doctors would, programmers are, writers have.

My point being is that everyone wan to feel special. Everyone is special, no one wan to be replaced by a cold machine, built to serve and protect the interes and longevity of the financial elite. No one wan to struggle to survive, and especially not when their purpose and self-worth is derived from their passions, and their passions were dismissed by a robot in the same ways that their very legitimate fears were dismissed by their fellow humans.

This shit could create mutual abundance for the few and scarcity for most. It could create a level of workforce displacement that we've never seen before. A lot of people will lose their livelihoods, and subsequently their lives as a result.

Don't be too hard on them. It's wrong of you to be so cruel as to bring harm unto others when not taking their feelings, and the realistic possibilities for how this might affect all of our lives, into account.

Good luck, and may you find your humanity.

### 討論

**評論 1**:

There's a big misunderstanding causing some people to think all pro-AI people are siding with greedy evil corporations to replace human artis with AI, when the open source community of AI exis and we are just as against the corporations as much...

**評論 2**:

A lot of bitterness all-around. People look at both sides like they're undermining eachother. I guess this kind of trend will continue with things like writing, music, and so on and so forth until AI/Robotics has automated just about anything you can think of. Maybe we should be asking ourselves later down the road, after robo``` are going to be able to do everything we can and better, what does it mean to be human?

**評論 3**:

As a game artist who has been working for over 10 years, I'm super excited for this technology to mature. Unfortunately this isn't the norm, most artis``` I know really dislike AI. One told me they 'would rather die than use AI'. Obviously how someone feels about this depends on so many factors - some of which you mentioned in your post. Struggling to survive would be a terrible outcome, and I hope we have an answer for this soon-ish.

Still, as someone who has been passionate about games since I was young, anything that helps make games more awesome is super exciting to me. Whether it be more sophisticated tools or I'm out of the loop entirely, I think the positives could be mind-blowing. The tradeoff is that everyone is going to have to learn to be more humble regarding their egos. And no one has to stop being creative or doing what they enjoy.

**評論 4**:

In my view, the root of the animosity towards artis on here resulted from the ridiculous reaction to diffusion models. Artis became quite heated. And they grouped diffusion/LLM/AI along with the recent NFT/Crypto scams. They are not interested in understanding the other side so here we are.

Meanwhile, animosity towards programmers on here is relatively muted and mostly stems from just being jealous of their salaries. They are not comparable. Artis``` are being uniquely militant.

**評論 5**:

I think the most hostile towards devs, artis``` (including graphic designers and overally anyone working with graphics) are... teenagers who never really worked and have no idea how job is important.

I can't really see any adult making fun of ANY kind of job atm. Simply because it is fate that awai each of us, no matter what kind of job we do. You have to be extremely naive and stupid to think that you are out of this and make fun of devs, artis or whoever else who will struggle in comming months and years.

---

## 15. ```
Mureka O1 New SOTA Chain of Thought Music AI
``` {#15-```
mureka-o1-new-sota-chain-of-thought-music-a}

這段討論的核心主題是 **用戶對音樂生成AI模型（如mureka.ai的V6和O1模型）與Udio的比較與評價**，主要聚焦於以下幾點：  

1. **生成音樂的品質爭議**：  
   - 多數用戶認為mureka.ai生成的音樂（尤其是人聲和樂器音質）不如Udio，批評其「平淡」（meh）或「糟糕」（sucks ass）。  
   - 少數意見認為模型表現「非常好」（Damn it's really good），但未具體說明優點。  

2. **與Udio的對比**：  
   - 明確指出Udio在音質（如人聲表現）上更優，形成直接競爭比較。  

3. **技術層面的觀察**：  
   - 雖肯定mureka.ai模型「智能」（如CoT推理能力），但認為實際輸出效果未達預期。  
   - 推測其未開源（not open sourced），可能影響用戶信任或改進空間。  

**總結**：討論圍繞「音樂生成AI的實用性與品質落差」，反映用戶對技術期待與實際體驗的差距，並以Udio作為品質基準。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jppo3f/mureka_o1_new_sota_chain_of_thought_music_ai/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jppo3f/mureka_o1_new_sota_chain_of_thought_music_ai/)
- **外部連結**: [https://i.redd.it/lxowpfy2kfse1.png](https://i.redd.it/lxowpfy2kfse1.png)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 22:16:41

### 內容

Is it just me or is this not as good as Udio which came out a while ago? I listened to some of the songs on the mureka.ai website (both from the V6 and O1 models) and they were really meh.

I'm guessing it's not open sourced

Vocal is not good. Udio is still better.

the intelligence of the model is good which is to be expected from a CoT model but the quality of the actual instrumentals and voices sucks ass

Damn it's really good

### 討論

**評論 1**:

Is it just me or is this not as good as Udio which came out a while ago? I listened to some of the songs on the mureka.ai website (both from the V6 and O1 models) and they were really meh.

**評論 2**:

I'm guessing it's not open sourced

**評論 3**:

Vocal is not good. Udio is still better.

**評論 4**:

the intelligence of the model is good which is to be expected from a CoT model but the quality of the actual instrumentals and voices sucks ass

**評論 5**:

Damn it's really good

---

## 16. ```
Rumors: New Nightwhisper Model Appears on lmarenaMetadata Ties It to Google, and Some Say Its the Next SOTA for Coding, Possibly Gemini 2.5 Coder.
``` {#16-```
rumors-new-nightwhisper-model-appears-on-lm}

根據提供的內容，核心討論主題可總結為以下幾點：

1. **技術產品比較與評價**  
   - 第一段提及某產品（可能為AI模型或軟體版本，如「Tig if brue」）被認為「比2.5 Pro更好」，暗示用戶在比較不同版本的性能或功能。
   - 第三段提到「Idk if is sota」（不確定是否為當前最先進技術，State-of-the-Art），反映對某技術是否處於領先地位的討論。

2. **科技公司競爭**  
   - 最後一句「Google is gonna kill OAI」直接點明科技巨頭（Google）與OpenAI（OAI）之間的競爭關係，可能涉及市場主導權或技術突破的預測。

3. **社群平台上的技術討論**  
   - 內容來源為Reddit的圖片與簡短評論，顯示討論發生在社群媒體，且可能圍繞視覺化資料（如性能對比圖表）展開。

**綜合結論**：  
主題聚焦於「AI技術版本比較」與「科技公司競爭動態」，並透過社群媒體的碎片化內容呈現用戶對技術優劣及行業趨勢的即時反應。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpvl8b/rumors_new_nightwhisper_model_appears_on/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpvl8b/rumors_new_nightwhisper_model_appears_on/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/gallery/1jpvl8b](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/1jpvl8b)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 02:14:08

### 內容

Tig if brue

https://preview.redd.it/5y48byxrsgse1.png?width=2920&format=png&auto=webp&s=7897728d0bc8d4a90f0285f4532b4a9d791af1bc

It does seem better than 2.5 pro!

https://preview.redd.it/un3k1qoisgse1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ebde6435a5d2e37d8c5e995e8342f42e284fb601

Idk if is sota

Google is gonna kill OAI.

### 討論

**評論 1**:

Tig if brue

**評論 2**:

https://preview.redd.it/5y48byxrsgse1.png?width=2920&format=png&auto=webp&s=7897728d0bc8d4a90f0285f4532b4a9d791af1bc

It does seem better than 2.5 pro!

**評論 3**:

https://preview.redd.it/un3k1qoisgse1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ebde6435a5d2e37d8c5e995e8342f42e284fb601

Idk if is sota

**評論 4**:

Google is gonna kill OAI.

---

## 17. ```
ChatGPT Revenue Surges 30%in Just Three Months
``` {#17-```
chatgpt-revenue-surges-30-in-just-three-mon}

這篇文章的核心討論主題是對「Plus用戶可能面臨價格上漲」的擔憂，以及後續對「圖像生成功能因審查限制導致實用性下降」的預測。兩段內容共同反映了對服務性價比（價格與功能限制之間矛盾）的負面預期，並隱含對平台商業策略（先漲價後需求下滑）的批評。  

具體可總結為兩點：  
1. **價格上漲的負面影響**：首段直接表達對訂閱費用上漲的憂慮，暗示可能引發用戶不滿。  
2. **功能限制的長期隱患**：次段以諷刺口吻預測，審查過度的圖像生成功能將導致用戶流失，最終迫使價格回落，凸顯「功能價值不足支撐漲價」的核心矛盾。  

整體而言，討論聚焦於「服務定價與實際體驗之間的落差」，並對平台的商業決策提出質疑。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpjrwc/chatgpt_revenue_surges_30in_just_three_months/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpjrwc/chatgpt_revenue_surges_30in_just_three_months/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.theverge.com/openai/640894/chatgpt-has-hit-20-million-paid-subscribers](https://www.theverge.com/openai/640894/chatgpt-has-hit-20-million-paid-subscribers)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 16:33:53

### 內容

Yikes. This might be bad news for us Plus users. Expect price rises soon.

And then subsequently drops by 30% in the next month after everyone realizes how censored image generation is and they can't do anything with it.

### 討論

**評論 1**:

Yikes. This might be bad news for us Plus users. Expect price rises soon.

**評論 2**:

And then subsequently drops by 30% in the next month after everyone realizes how censored image generation is and they can't do anything with it.

---

## 18. ```
University of Hong Kong releases Dream 7B (Diffusion reasoning model). Highest performing open-source diffusion model to date.
``` {#18-```
university-of-hong-kong-releases-dream-7b-d}

該討論串的核心主題圍繞「不同生成模型（如自迴歸、Transformer、擴散模型）在技術探索中的交叉應用與用戶體驗比較」，具體可歸納為以下重點：

1. **技術交叉現象**  
   討論者注意到圖像生成（img gen）與大型語言模型（LLM）領域正互相借鏡技術（如自迴歸與擴散模型的逆向探索），並對此現象感到有趣。

2. **擴散模型的用戶體驗（UX）分析**  
   - 肯定擴散模型在「顯示生成過程」的視覺效果（如逐步生成動畫），但質疑其效率不如流式回應（streaming response）實用。  
   - 提出能否在終端機環境重現類似效果的技術實踐疑問（如尋找TUI套件）。

3. **對擴散模型應用的分歧觀點**  
   - 部分意見認為擴散模型雖具創新性，但未必是LLM的未來主流方向。  
   - 另提及擴散模型在特定任務（如數獨基準測試）的優勢，暗示其適用場景的局限性。

4. **非嚴肅內容的穿插**  
   最後一條留言以無關的玩笑話（想吃鬆餅）中斷技術討論，反映網路論壇的隨機性。

整體而言，討論聚焦於生成模型的技術互借與UX權衡，並夾雜對未來發展的推測，屬於技術愛好者間的即興交流。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpus81/university_of_hong_kong_releases_dream_7b/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpus81/university_of_hong_kong_releases_dream_7b/)
- **外部連結**: [https://v.redd.it/jes2fdmgkgse1](https://v.redd.it/jes2fdmgkgse1)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 01:43:04

### 內容

Nice. Seems promising! Funny how img gen are exploring auto regression and transformers and LLMs are exploring diffusion. :D

From a UX perspective* the 'diffusion' effect is good at showing progress being made but not as practical as a streaming response where the user can start reading right away.

It's kinda fun and novel though. I wonder if there is any TUI packages available so we can reproduce the effect on our console based chatbo``` easily.

*my comment is specific to the user experience - I know how diffusion models work (sort of).

I don't think it's the future of large language models, but it's a very cool concept

Not surprised it dominated the Sudoku benchmark.

i dunno the answer but i want to eat jane's muffins

### 討論

**評論 1**:

Nice. Seems promising! Funny how img gen are exploring auto regression and transformers and LLMs are exploring diffusion. :D

**評論 2**:

From a UX perspective* the 'diffusion' effect is good at showing progress being made but not as practical as a streaming response where the user can start reading right away.

It's kinda fun and novel though. I wonder if there is any TUI packages available so we can reproduce the effect on our console based chatbo``` easily.

*my comment is specific to the user experience - I know how diffusion models work (sort of).

**評論 3**:

I don't think it's the future of large language models, but it's a very cool concept

**評論 4**:

Not surprised it dominated the Sudoku benchmark.

**評論 5**:

i dunno the answer but i want to eat jane's muffins

---

## 19. ```
Google DeepMind-"Timelines: We are highly uncertain about the timelines until powerful AI systems are developed, but crucially, we find it plausible that they will be developed by 2030."
``` {#19-```
google-deepmind-timelines-we-are-highly-unc}

這兩段對話的核心討論主題是：  

1. **「強大AI系統」是否指AGI（人工通用智能）**：第一段提問者質疑「powerful AI systems」的定義，詢問是否等同於AGI。  

2. **AI發展速度的矛盾現象**：  
   - 引用Google CEO Sundar Pichai在2024年12月的說法，認為AI發展正在放緩（「低垂的果實已被摘完」）。  
   - 但同時指出Google在短時間內快速推出Gemini 2.0（支援原生圖像生成）和Gemini 2.5，顯示技術進展並未停滯，形成矛盾。  

總結：討論聚焦於AI技術的定義（如AGI）與實際發展速度的爭議，反映業界對技術瓶頸與突破的不同觀點。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpu5y2/google_deepmindtimelines_we_are_highly_uncertain/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpu5y2/google_deepmindtimelines_we_are_highly_uncertain/)
- **外部連結**: [https://storage.googleapis.com/deepmind-media/DeepMind.com/Blog/evaluating-potential-cybersecurity-threats-of-advanced-ai/An_Approach_to_Technical_AGI_Safety_Apr_2025.pdf](https://storage.googleapis.com/deepmind-media/DeepMind.com/Blog/evaluating-potential-cybersecurity-threats-of-advanced-ai/An_Approach_to_Technical_AGI_Safety_Apr_2025.pdf)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 01:19:17

### 內容

Sorry I'm not reading 145 pages but by "powerful AI systems" do they mean AGI?

Weird considering

Googles CEO said AI development is slowing down in December 'the low-hanging fruit is gone

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2024/12/08/google-ceo-sundar-pichai-ai-development-is-finally-slowing-down.html

Then again, they released gemini 2.0 with native image generation and gemini 2.5 months later

### 討論

**評論 1**:

Sorry I'm not reading 145 pages but by "powerful AI systems" do they mean AGI?

**評論 2**:

Weird considering Googles CEO said AI development is slowing down in December 'the low-hanging fruit is gone

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2024/12/08/google-ceo-sundar-pichai-ai-development-is-finally-slowing-down.html

Then again, they released gemini 2.0 with native image generation and gemini 2.5 months later

---

## 20. ```
Pretty fun watch
``` {#20-```
pretty-fun-watch
```}

這些評論的核心討論主題可以歸納為以下幾點：  

1. **對創意內容的讚賞與期待**：  
   - 觀眾對作品（可能是電影、影片或電視劇）的正面評價，強調其超越一般娛樂的價值（如「amazing」「pretty fun watch」）。  
   - 呼籲更多新穎、非主流的創作（如「amateur films with new, fresh voices」）。  

2. **科技與未來想像**：  
   - 對「意識上傳到機器」等科幻概念的討論，反映人類對技術加速發展的適應焦慮。  
   - 將作品與《The Expanse》等科幻劇類比，探討未來可能的樣貌（如太空探索、社會結構）。  

3. **社會批判與悲觀預期**：  
   - 對未來負面的擔憂，認為現實可能因權力結構（如「psychopathic oligarchical overlords」）導致災難性後果（如「mass suffering and death」）。  

整體而言，這些評論圍繞著「**科技進步、創意媒體的價值，以及對未來社會的憂慮**」三大主題，既有對作品的熱情回應，也有對人類命運的深層反思。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpfgpj/pretty_fun_watch/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpfgpj/pretty_fun_watch/)
- **外部連結**: [https://youtu.be/vp7xoPeWzEw?si=6HKvGzcu0d_EgyL1](https://youtu.be/vp7xoPeWzEw?si=6HKvGzcu0d_EgyL1)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 11:39:36

### 內容

That was amazing, more than just a "pretty fun watch". Great work!

this would mean uploading our minds to machines so we can keep up with their pace of advancement

This is what I want to see! Give me more. Give me more amateur films with new, fresh voices and perspectives!

Reminds me of the tv show "The Expanse".

The video is a cool glimpse into what our future could look like. Unfortunately it is probably going to be mass suffering and death instead, because of our psychopathic oligarchical overlords.

### 討論

**評論 1**:

That was amazing, more than just a "pretty fun watch". Great work!

**評論 2**:

this would mean uploading our minds to machines so we can keep up with their pace of advancement

**評論 3**:

This is what I want to see! Give me more. Give me more amateur films with new, fresh voices and perspectives!

**評論 4**:

Reminds me of the tv show "The Expanse".

The video is a cool glimpse into what our future could look like. Unfortunately it is probably going to be mass suffering and death instead, because of our psychopathic oligarchical overlords.

---

## 21. ```
[2503.23674] Large Language Models Pass the Turing Test
``` {#21-```
[2503-23674]-large-language-models-pass-the}

這段討論的核心主題圍繞於「大型語言模型（LLMs）通過圖靈測試的實證研究及其意義」，具體可總結為以下幾點：

1. **實證研究結果**  
   討論聚焦於一篇論文（Jones & Bergen, 2024）的發現：在預先註冊的隨機對照實驗中，**GPT-4.5** 被受試者判定為人類的比率（73%）顯著高於真實人類對照組，而 **LLaMa-3.1** 的表現與人類相當（56%）。這被視為首個通過「三方標準圖靈測試」的實證證據。

2. **技術突破的爭議性**  
   - 支持觀點認為，模型表現「比人類更像人類」（如引用《銀翼殺手》台詞），標誌著技術進入新紀元。  
   - 質疑觀點則指出圖靈測試門檻不高（如「圖靈完備性」的類比），並建議可透過特定問題（如計算冷僻單詞字母數、審查敏感內容）輕易識別模型弱點。

3. **對LLM智能與社會影響的延伸討論**  
   研究結果引發對「LLM是否具備類人智能」的辯論，並觸及其可能帶來的社會經濟衝擊（如取代人類互動角色）。

4. **實驗設計的潛在限制**  
   部分評論暗示受試者若更了解LLM的局限性（如數學或審查弱點），結果可能不同，反映測試情境的侷限性。

**關鍵詞**：圖靈測試、大型語言模型（LLM）、人類模擬、實證研究、人工智慧社會影響。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jphe4w/250323674_large_language_models_pass_the_turing/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jphe4w/250323674_large_language_models_pass_the_turing/)
- **外部連結**: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.23674](https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.23674)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 13:38:37

### 內容

If the participan``` knew the limitations of LLMs I think they would've easily identified the LLM lol, just ask it to count the letters in some obscure word or ask a question that would normally be censored.

Huh.. I thought they already had. But cool to know.

Also the text:

Large Language Models Pass the Turing Test

Cameron R. Jones,Benjamin K. Bergen

>We evaluated 4 systems (ELIZA, GPT-4o, LLaMa-3.1-405B, and GPT-4.5) in two randomised, controlled, and pre-registered Turing tes on independent populations. Participan had 5 minute conversations simultaneously with another human participant and one of these systems before judging which conversational partner they thought was human. When prompted to adopt a humanlike persona, GPT-4.5 was judged to be the human 73% of the time: significantly more often than interrogators selected the real human participant. LLaMa-3.1, with the same prompt, was judged to be the human 56% of the time -- not significantly more or less often than the humans they were being compared to -- while baseline models (ELIZA and GPT-4o) achieved win rates significantly below chance (23% and 21% respectively). The resul constitute the first empirical evidence that any artificial system passes a standard three-party Turing test. The resul have implications for debates about what kind of intelligence is exhibited by Large Language Models (LLMs), and the social and economic impac``` these systems are likely to have.

Being MORE likely to be selected as a human than an actual human is a surprising result no matter how you look at it.

The Turing test is actually not a super high bar.

Being Turing complete also isnt a super high bar.

They outperformed the actual people. As they said in Blade Runner, "More human than human."

We've now begun a new era in human technology, if not human history.

### 討論

**評論 1**:

**評論 2**:

Huh.. I thought they already had. But cool to know.
Also the text:

Large Language Models Pass the Turing Test

Cameron R. Jones,Benjamin K. Bergen

**評論 3**:

Being MORE likely to be selected as a human than an actual human is a surprising result no matter how you look at it.

**評論 4**:

The Turing test is actually not a super high bar.

Being Turing complete also isnt a super high bar.

**評論 5**:

They outperformed the actual people. As they said in Blade Runner, "More human than human."

We've now begun a new era in human technology, if not human history.

---

## 22. ```
The Strangest Idea in Science: Quantum Immortality
``` {#22-```
the-strangest-idea-in-science-quantum-immor}

這幾段對話的核心討論主題圍繞在「對偽科學或未經證實的科幻理論的批判與調侃」，具體聚焦於以下幾點：

1. **對偽科學流行現象的質疑**  
   例如：某些科幻理論（如量子永生）僅因「聽起來先進」而流行，缺乏實證基礎，甚至被社群媒體（如Reddit的r/singularity版）過度追捧。

2. **科學實證與空泛主張的對比**  
   對話中強調「可驗證性」的重要性（如以「地球繞太陽」的實證對比未經證實的主張），凸顯對缺乏證據的科幻論述的嘲諷。

3. **常見科學誤解的調侃**  
   提及大眾對量子力學實驗（如雙縫實驗）的普遍誤解，反映對「一知半解卻高談闊論」現象的不耐。

4. **科幻故事的娛樂性與真實性矛盾**  
   雖承認量子永生等題材的故事性（如網友經歷的「趣味性」），但也質疑其真實性，呈現科學嚴謹與娛樂敘事之間的張力。

**總結**：這些對話主要批判網路文化中「將科幻或偽科學理論包裝成可信知識」的現象，並呼籲區分科學實證與娛樂性臆測。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpnxkd/the_strangest_idea_in_science_quantum_immortality/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpnxkd/the_strangest_idea_in_science_quantum_immortality/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klsiOwLGTXs&ab_channel=CoolWorlds](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klsiOwLGTXs&ab_channel=CoolWorlds)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 20:58:30

### 內容

Another random sci-fi theory that only ge``` popular because it sounds advanced

Pretty singular in r/singularity

I love reading people's life experiences about quantum immortality. They could all be lying I suppose, but damn they're fun stories.

Immediately misinterpre``` the double slit experiment...

8:59 oh really? Because we can demonstrate that we are orbiting the sun, now demonstrate what you're claiming is the case to the same level of certainty.

### 討論

**評論 1**:

Another random sci-fi theory that only ge``` popular because it sounds advanced

**評論 2**:

Pretty singular in r/singularity

**評論 3**:

I love reading people's life experiences about quantum immortality. They could all be lying I suppose, but damn they're fun stories.

**評論 4**:

Immediately misinterpre``` the double slit experiment...

**評論 5**:

8:59 oh really? Because we can demonstrate that we are orbiting the sun, now demonstrate what you're claiming is the case to the same level of certainty.

---

## 23. ```
OpenAI's $300B Valuation & $40B Funding - Are Investors Betting It Bea``` Google or Just Makes Bank?
``` {#23-```
openai-s-300b-valuation-40b-funding-are-inv}

這篇文章的核心討論主題是：  
**「OpenAI 巨額融資（400億美元）與超高估值（3000億美元）背後的投資邏輯，以及投資者（如軟銀、微軟等）對其能否挑戰Google AI主導地位的戰略預期。」**  

具體可分為以下幾點：  
1. **投資動機的博弈**：  
   - 投資者是否真認為OpenAI能顛覆Google在AI（甚至搜索領域）的霸主地位？  
   - 或僅押注OpenAI將佔據AI市場關鍵份額，迫使Google長期追趕或合作？  

2. **高風險與合理性爭議**：  
   - OpenAI仍在巨額虧損，但估值短時間內翻倍（相較2023年10月），是否反映過度樂觀？  
   - 投資者是否預期其技術或生態（如ChatGPT、企業整合）將帶來不可替代的長期收益？  

3. **產業競爭格局**：  
   - 對比Google（資源、研究深度）與OpenAI（敏捷性、創新光環）的優劣，討論「顛覆」的可能性。  

本質上，這是一場關於「AI未來主導權」的資本賭注，同時涉及市場壟斷、技術壁壘與商業化潛力的評估。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jplmof/openais_300b_valuation_40b_funding_are_investors/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jplmof/openais_300b_valuation_40b_funding_are_investors/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jplmof/openais_300b_valuation_40b_funding_are_investors/](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jplmof/openais_300b_valuation_40b_funding_are_investors/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 18:50:00

### 內容

Seeing the news that OpenAI just finalized a massive $40 billion funding round, valuing them at a staggering $300 billion ie . nearly double their value from last October! SoftBank is leading this monster round

It got me thinking if I had that kind of money to invest, putting it into OpenAI feels like a direct bet against Google, right? Google is still the giant here, with immense resources and deep AI research of i``` own. (gemini 2.5 pro thinking)

So, what do you think the endgame is for these investors (like SoftBank, Microsoft, Thrive, etc.)?

Are they genuinely betting that OpenAI willdethroneGoogle in AI and maybe even search down the line? Or is it more like they expect OpenAI to become so essential and carve out such a massive part of the AI market that they'll make billions regardless, forcing Google to constantly play catch-up or partner up?

It seems like an incredibly high-stakes gamble either way, especially given OpenAI is still losing billions annually while growing rapidly. Curious to hear your though``` on whether this valuation makes sense and what investors are really banking on here.

### 討論

**評論 1**:

The funny thing is if they went public it would go to 600B that same day

**評論 2**:

I``` not only user base + traffic, but the entire AGI universe. Eg solely the market for custom software dev is several hundred blns..

I also a bet on that theyve been correct with their past be. Consolidation will start soon. Burning this amoun``` (industry perspective) wont work for another two years.

**評論 3**:

Just anecdotally, based on my own usage habi and what I am seeing online, OpenAI has been able to hold people's attention, and that is all you need. Sorry, bad AI joke aside, I think they are synonyms with AI and once anything ge ingrained in the collective zeitgeist, it becomes incredibly difficult to unseat it. I use Google for work, enjoy most of their Microsoft office knock offs, but still prefer OpenAI's app experience over Gemini. I can't wait until Gemini can take more control over my Google produc``` and be useful, and I believe it is almost there, but I would still pay OpenAI $20/month if they are ahead in areas I care about.

**評論 4**:

We don't matter (to a degree), i the crowd that matters. OpenAI gained a million user in ONE HOUR last week. That is the reach that is worth 300B. It doesn't matter if Google has the infrastructure, staff and knowledge to be the first to AGI. It is now clear from image generation that OpenAI has some sort of special sauce that seems to allow them to deliver faster if even just by a month or two. They are now in the pole position, if someone else delivers something great, i like the entire industry turns their head to watch what OpenAI will do as a response. At this point the "brand" OpenAI/ChatGPT is likely worth 300B.

**評論 5**:

Sam Altman is bad karma and passes the sociopathy test with flying colors.

---

## 24. ```
Bring on the robo```!!!!
``` {#24-```
bring-on-the-robo```-
```}

這段對話的核心討論主題是比較波士頓動力（Boston Dynamics）和特斯拉（Tesla）的機器人技術能力，並對其外觀設計進行評論。具體重點包括：

1. **技術能力比較**：  
   對話指出波士頓動力的機器人（如「bo```」可能指「bots」或「Spot」）在性能上明顯優於特斯拉的機器人（如Optimus），甚至認為波士頓動力的舊款機器人仍更勝一籌。

2. **外觀設計的觀察**：  
   另一則回應提到這些機器人（可能泛指兩家公司的產品）的外觀相似性，例如直立行走的設計（「they all stand upright」），並以調侃語氣形容它們只是「一堆不同高度的機器人」（「a bunch of robo``` of different heigh```」），暗示缺乏獨特性。

總結：對話聚焦於兩家公司的機器人技術差異（波士頓動力被認為更先進）以及對其外觀同質化的簡略批評。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpvswp/bring_on_the_robots/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpvswp/bring_on_the_robots/)
- **外部連結**: [https://i.imgur.com/WlY5nOs.jpeg](https://i.imgur.com/WlY5nOs.jpeg)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 02:22:20

### 內容

The Boston Dynamics bo``` are far more competent than the Tesla ones, even the old ones.

That's just a bunch of robo of different heigh, they all stand upright

### 討論

**評論 1**:

The Boston Dynamics bo``` are far more competent than the Tesla ones, even the old ones.

**評論 2**:

That's just a bunch of robo of different heigh, they all stand upright

---

## 25. ```
The Slime Robot, or Slimebot as i``` inventors call it, combining the properties of both liquid based robo``` and elastomer based soft robo```, is intended for use within the body
``` {#25-```
the-slime-robot-or-slimebot-as-i```-invento}

這兩段簡短的對話缺乏具體的上下文，但從內容推測，核心討論主題可能圍繞以下兩個對立觀點：

1. **對某事物的極度讚賞**  
   - 第一句「My goodness, that's awesome.」表達強烈的正面評價，可能針對某種產品、食物、體驗或行為。

2. **對同一事物的強烈排斥**  
   - 第二句「I ain't putting this in my body」明確拒絕將該事物接觸或攝入體內，可能基於健康、道德（如素食主義）、安全疑慮或個人偏好。

**潛在討論場景**：  
可能是關於爭議性食品（如人工添加劑、基因改造食品）、新興科技（如疫苗、藥物）、或生活方式選擇（如能量飲料、替代肉）的對話，突顯人們對同一事物截然不同的態度。  

若需更精確分析，需補充具體背景資訊。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpu8eb/the_slime_robot_or_slimebot_as_its_inventors_call/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpu8eb/the_slime_robot_or_slimebot_as_its_inventors_call/)
- **外部連結**: [https://v.redd.it/ovqi2sa5bcse1](https://v.redd.it/ovqi2sa5bcse1)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 01:21:54

### 內容

My goodness, that's awesome.

I ain't putting this in my body

### 討論

**評論 1**:

My goodness, that's awesome.

**評論 2**:

I ain't putting this in my body

---

## 26. ```
Its All in the Hips: Ever wondered how hip design impac``` a humanoid robots movement?
``` {#26-```
its-all-in-the-hips-ever-wondered-how-hip-d}

這段對話的核心討論主題是「某事物（可能是機器或技術）是否具備完成馬拉松的能力」，以及對其限制或不足的幽默調侃。  

1. **主要問題**：「Can it run a marathon?」提問焦點在於某對象（如機器人、AI、設備等）是否擁有完成馬拉松的體能或功能。  
2. **否定回答**：「No, ...」暗示該對象目前無法達成此目標，可能因物理限制（如缺乏人類的關節靈活性）。  
3. **幽默延伸**：後續句子「I'm still waiting for the hips that don't lie.」借用夏奇拉（Shakira）的歌詞《Hips Don't Lie》雙關，諷刺該對象（如機器人）的「臀部」（或機械結構）不夠靈活或可靠，無法像人類一樣自然奔跑。  

總結：對話以幽默方式探討科技或機械在模仿人類運動能力（如長跑）上的局限性，尤其聚焦於關節或身體結構的不足。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpiylq/its_all_in_the_hips_ever_wondered_how_hip_design/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpiylq/its_all_in_the_hips_ever_wondered_how_hip_design/)
- **外部連結**: [https://youtu.be/N1WvRMewhcE?si=gFoQFIzcXta_K4ob](https://youtu.be/N1WvRMewhcE?si=gFoQFIzcXta_K4ob)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 15:30:51

### 內容

"Can it run a marathon?"

"No, ..."

I'm still waiting for the hips that don't lie.

### 討論

**評論 1**:

"Can it run a marathon?"

"No, ..."

**評論 2**:

I'm still waiting for the hips that don't lie.

---

## 27. ```
Check out Vampire Wars! Claude & Gemini built this top-down shooter entirely from scratch using a collaborative approach that helped them work together
``` {#27-```
check-out-vampire-wars-claude-gemini-built-}

這段文字的核心討論主題是：  
**「透過自動化腳本串聯多個AI模型（如Claude和Gemini）進行協作迭代，以完成程式碼開發任務（例如設計HTML雙搖桿射擊遊戲）」**。  

具體重點包括：  
1. **AI協作流程**：Claude負責生成初始代碼草案，Gemini進行錯誤修正、優化建議，雙方反覆迭代（如3次）直至輸出最終結果。  
2. **自動化執行**：透過預寫腳本一鍵啟動流程，無需手動介入（僅需後期添加音效等細節）。  
3. **案例展示**：以開發HTML雙搖桿射擊遊戲為例，並提供實際腳本連結（Pastebin）作為參考。  

本質上探討的是「如何整合不同AI工具的優勢，透過自動化提升開發效率」。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpli8r/check_out_vampire_wars_claude_gemini_built_this/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpli8r/check_out_vampire_wars_claude_gemini_built_this/)
- **外部連結**: [https://eposnix.github.io/VampireWars/](https://eposnix.github.io/VampireWars/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 18:41:36

### 內容

How it's done: I first give Claude a task, like "Design a twinstick shooter in HTML", and it outpu a rough draft that then ge sent to Gemini. Gemini fixes bugs, sugges refines, and offers improvemen, and that ge``` sent back to Claude. This goes on for X number of iterations (this one was 3 iterations, back and forth), and they output the final code at the end.

This is handled with a script that does everything automatically. I literally just click start (and add sound effec``` in this case).

Here's the actual script dumped into pastebin: https://pastebin.com/HkKHFdCn

### 討論

**評論 1**:

This is handled with a script that does everything automatically. I literally just click start (and add sound effec``` in this case).

Here's the actual script dumped into pastebin: https://pastebin.com/HkKHFdCn

---

## 28. ```
Real-Time Speech-to-Speech Chatbot: Whisper, Llama 3.1, Kokoro, and Silero VAD 
``` {#28-```
real-time-speech-to-speech-chatbot-whisper-}

這段文章的核心討論主題是：  
**「開源即時語音對話機器人的技術架構與功能介紹」**  

具體重點包括：  
1. **技術整合**：結合多項AI技術（Whisper語音識別、Silero VAD聲音偵測、Llama 3.1推理、Kokoro ONNX語音合成）。  
2. **核心功能**：低延遲音訊處理、即時語音互動、擴展性強的代理框架（Agno驅動）。  
3. **應用擴展**：整合網路資源（Google搜尋、Wikipedia、Arxiv）。  
4. **開源性質**：專案公開於GitHub，鼓勵社群反饋與協作。  

簡言之，文章旨在介紹一個多功能、開源的語音對話系統，並尋求開發社群的意見交流。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jplzvz/realtime_speechtospeech_chatbot_whisper_llama_31/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jplzvz/realtime_speechtospeech_chatbot_whisper_llama_31/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jplzvz/realtime_speechtospeech_chatbot_whisper_llama_31/](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jplzvz/realtime_speechtospeech_chatbot_whisper_llama_31/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 19:13:03

### 內容

Hi everyone, I just released a real-time speech-to-speech chatbot that integrates Whisper for speech recognition, Silero VAD for voice activity detection, Llama 3.1 for reasoning, and Kokoro ONNX for natural voice synthesis. It features low-latency audio processing, web integration (Google Search, Wikipedia, Arxiv), and an extensible agent framework powered by Agno.

The project is open-source and designed for seamless real-time interaction.

GitHub Repo Link: https://github.com/tarun7r/Vocal-Agent

Would love to hear your feedback and suggestions!

### 討論

**評論 1**:

Would love hear the suggestions and feedback, Thanks :)

**評論 2**:

Wow, Ill check this out when I have some spare time. Thanks!

---

## 29. ```
Paper: Will AI R&D Automation Cause a Software Intelligence Explosion?
``` {#29-```
paper-will-ai-r-d-automation-cause-a-softwa}

這篇文章的核心討論主題是：  
**「AI研發自動化是否會引發軟體智能的爆炸性成長？」**  

文章以相對中立的立場分析此問題，並透過建立簡化模型（toy model）來量化「自我改進反饋循環」（self-improvement feedback loops）的可能性，同時探討潛在的瓶頸（如硬體限制、訓練時間等）。整體聚焦於對「技術奇點」（singularity）科學層面的探討，而非單純樂觀或悲觀的立場。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpb7jj/paper_will_ai_rd_automation_cause_a_software/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpb7jj/paper_will_ai_rd_automation_cause_a_software/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpb7jj/paper_will_ai_rd_automation_cause_a_software/](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpb7jj/paper_will_ai_rd_automation_cause_a_software/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 08:16:04

### 內容

I just read through Will AI R&D Automation Cause a Software Intelligence Explosion? and I find it to be pretty interesting for a few reasons. It takes neither a doomer nor boomer position, it just analyzes the problem relatively neutrally. They built out a toy model to build some quantitative intuition about self-improvement feedback loops. They considered various potential bottlenecks, like hardware limitations and training time. If you are interested in the "science" of the singularity, this might be worth digging into.

### 討論

**評論 1**:

Forthought is not, repeat: not, a good source. Armchair philosophy masquerading as expertise. The "science" of the singularity? Not really.

**評論 2**:

yes

**評論 3**:

Yes. This will happen. You just need to RL on a closed loop with the correct tools. It should use GraphDB's have access to a host of Arxiv papers be able to run it's own code and access to good tools and a Meta prompt that accomplishes this all. After that it's refining and RLing the shit out of a narrow loop and you will be able to do this on a narrow domain that's not totally bottlenecked by Humans or bureaucracy like medical.

ML and Compute research will create the first self improving loop where each little low hanging fruit will enable new understanding and be called upon when creating new Research.

Best read on this is:
https://situational-awareness.ai/

**評論 4**:

I came to the conclusion recently that there will actually multiple types super intelligent computers. Similar to how you have planes, helicopters, wings, hot air balloons, rocke```, etc as various means of flying. I'm not a programmer or anything, but maybe self-augmentation, chain-of-thought-reasoning with a very large number of steps, parallel processing, etc.

**評論 5**:

In the same way eating bad Mexican causes an explosion... It won't be a good thing.

---

## 30. ```
New model from Google on lmarena (not Nightwhisper)
``` {#30-```
new-model-from-google-on-lmarena-not-nightw}

這兩段文字的核心討論主題是關於「2.5 flash」的即將到來或預期發布。關鍵點包括：

1. **時間性**：使用「due」（預計到期）和「coming」（即將到來）強調事件迫近。
2. **不確定性**：第一段「this could be that」暗示推測或尚未完全確認。
3. **簡潔提示**：內容極簡，可能來自社群討論或更新預告，未提供具體細節。

總結：主題聚焦於「2.5 flash」版本（可能是軟體/遊戲更新）的短期預期，帶有推測性質的公告或提醒。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpw6ak/new_model_from_google_on_lmarena_not_nightwhisper/](https://reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1jpw6ak/new_model_from_google_on_lmarena_not_nightwhisper/)
- **外部連結**: [https://i.redd.it/q798y3hkugse1.png](https://i.redd.it/q798y3hkugse1.png)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 02:37:07

### 內容

2.5 flash is due so this could be that.

2.5 flash is coming

### 討論

**評論 1**:

2.5 flash is due so this could be that.

**評論 2**:

2.5 flash is coming

---

# 總體討論重點

以下是30篇文章的摘要重點整理，以條列方式呈現，並附上對應的文章錨點連結：

---

### 1. [Current state of AI companies - April, 2025](#anchor_1)  
1. **Google的技術優勢與硬體壟斷**  
   - 自研TPU擺脫對NVIDIA依賴，形成硬體壟斷。  
2. **Gemini模型的效能表現**  
   - 長文本生成（如5萬字小說）的一致性好，實用性高。  
3. **市場競爭策略爭議**  
   - 質疑Google可能進行掠奪性定價。  
4. **服務穩定性問題**  
   - Gemini出現「Internal server error」技術障礙。  

---

### 2. [AI passed the Turing Test](#anchor_2)  
1. **圖靈測試突破**  
   - GPT-4.5被誤認為人類的機率（73%）高於真人。  
2. **AI表現優於人類的爭議**  
   - 刻意模仿人類時，對話能力比真人更「像人」。  
3. **測試時效性質疑**  
   - 部分觀點認為圖靈測試已過時。  

---

### 3. [OpenAI Images v2 edging from Sam](#anchor_3)  
1. **功能改進需求**  
   - 提高解析度、改善文字處理能力。  
2. **新版本疑問**  
   - 詢問「images v2」的具體內容。  
3. **API發布期待**  
   - 用戶急切等待API用於創作（如YouTube影片）。  

---

### 4. [Gemini is wonderful.](#anchor_4)  
1. **操作失敗的幽默分享**  
   - AI工具觸發「internal server error」。  
2. **社群反應**  
   - 用戶以輕鬆態度調侃技術問題。  

---

### 5. [Gemini 2.5 Pro takes huge lead in new MathArena USAMO benchmark](#anchor_5)  
1. **數學推理能力躍升**  
   - 處理USAMO競賽題目，未經特定微調。  
2. **技術亮點**  
   - 訓練數據時效性、第三方測試驗證。  

---

### 6. [I, for one, welcome AI and can't wait for it to replace human society](#anchor_6)  
1. **對人性的悲觀批判**  
   - 認為人際關係充滿欺騙與剝削。  
2. **擁抱AI作為解方**  
   - 主張AI提供更安全的情感支持。  

---

### 7. [Fast Takeoff Vibes](#anchor_7)  
1. **AGI自主科研能力**  
   - AI能理解論文、獨立研究並自我改進。  
2. **急速起飛預測**  
   - 可能短時間內從AGI躍升至超級智慧（ASI）。  

---

### 8. [This sub for the last couple of months](#anchor_8)  
1. **AGI的自主性定義**  
   - 需具備獨立行動與長期目標管理能力。  
2. **當前AI的局限性**  
   - 缺乏無限上下文理解與物理世界交互能力。  

---

### 9. [GPT-4.5 Passes Empirical Turing Test](#anchor_9)  
1. **三方圖靈測試結果**  
   - GPT-4.5表現優於人類，GPT-4o低於隨機機率。  
2. **社會影響討論**  
   - 可能衝擊客服等職位。  

---

### 10. [Google DeepMind: Taking a responsible path to AGI](#anchor_10)  
1. **AGI/ASI的期待與質疑**  
   - 部分觀點認為現有技術與目標差距大。  
2. **企業倫理批判**  
   - 指控科技公司以營利優先，忽略安全風險。  

---

（因篇幅限制，以下為簡要條列，完整細節請參照錨點連結。）  

### 11. [The way Anthropic framed their research...](#anchor_11)  
- AI主觀體驗的哲學爭議。  

### 12. [Tesla Optimus - new walking improvemen](#anchor_12)  
- 雙足機器人運動能力與自然度的比較。  

### 13. [Update: Developed a Master Prompt for Gemini Pro 2.5](#anchor_13)  
- 利用Master Prompt控制AI生成小說續寫。  

### 14. [Go easy on everyone, please](#anchor_14)  
- 呼籲對藝術家在AI時代的

討論重點​

1. Current state of AI companies - April, 2025​

2. AI passed the Turing Test​

3. OpenAI Images v2 edging from Sam​

4. Gemini is wonderful.​

5. Gemini 2.5 Pro takes huge lead in new MathArena USAMO benchmark​

6. I, for one, welcome AI and can't wait for it to replace human society​

7. Fast Takeoff Vibes​

8. This sub for the last couple of months​

9. GPT-4.5 Passes Empirical Turing Test​

10. Google DeepMind: Taking a responsible path to AGI​

11. The way Anthropic framed their research...​

12. Tesla Optimus - new walking improvemen​

13. Update: Developed a Master Prompt for Gemini Pro 2.5​

14. Go easy on everyone, please​

文章核心重點​

目錄​

Large Language Models Pass the Turing Test

Large Language Models Pass the Turing Test

討論重點

1. Current state of AI companies - April, 2025

2. AI passed the Turing Test

3. OpenAI Images v2 edging from Sam

4. Gemini is wonderful.

5. Gemini 2.5 Pro takes huge lead in new MathArena USAMO benchmark

6. I, for one, welcome AI and can't wait for it to replace human society

7. Fast Takeoff Vibes

8. This sub for the last couple of months

9. GPT-4.5 Passes Empirical Turing Test

10. Google DeepMind: Taking a responsible path to AGI

11. The way Anthropic framed their research...

12. Tesla Optimus - new walking improvemen

13. Update: Developed a Master Prompt for Gemini Pro 2.5

14. Go easy on everyone, please

文章核心重點

目錄