lurker

u/lurker@awful.systems
8 posts · 379 comments

Recent posts

Recent comments

Ported over from previous thread

Recently made the discovery of a website called AI 2027 tracker which grades the predictions of AI 2027 independent of the authors.

The way they grade these predictions is odd, 80% accuracy is for some reason "confirmed accurate" and "partially accurate" which is bizarre.

The website also shows a consistent degradation of accuracy over time which is funny

EDIT:ok so they do have a grading criteria, 100% is "highly accurate/confirmed accurate" and 80% is supposed to be "largely accurate". For some reason they don't include this on the timeline grading? it's either confirmed or partially accurate, so it's still weird

Full list of predictions here was scrolling down and something that immediately caught my eye is that the %s are bullshit. Somehow 80% accuracy manages to be both confirmed accurate and partially accurate? what?? what's the threshold here??

Also does appear I messed up-they split every prediction into mini subcategories. I was looking at only China pushing AI-they do have sections for chips and nationalisation, both of which are partially accurate to debunked. Which makes that 46% accurate, more of a miss than a hit (like the authors said)

The same authors did publish AI 2040 yes

They started backpedalling a fair bit earlier (at the beginning of 2026) their % chance of AGI in 2027 has halved from the release of AI 2027 to day (from 40% down to 23%)

Got another one: AI 2027 tracker. it’s not run by the authors of AI 2027 so its takes are different: like the authors say that the ‘China wakes up’ prediction was a miss while this website claims it was correct (even though their main source of evidence comes from April 2025, and their other evidence completely misses what that prediction actually said, which was that China would hoard compute and nationalise AI, neither of which have happened)