OpenAI's new reasoning model, o3, which has not yet been released publicly but they have announced almost 2 hours ago has scored a breakthrough 75.7% in low-compute mode (for $20 per task in compute) at their public leaderboard. A high-compute mode (thousands of $ per task) o3 configuration scored 87.5%.

A lot of people online on Twitter and on the singularity subreddit are saying that AGI has been achieved internally because of this but as François Chollet (the creator of the ARC-AGI benchmark) wrote on his Twitter thread discussing this breakthrough:

While the new model is very impressive and represents a big milestone on the way towards AGI, I don't believe this is AGI -- there's still a fair number of very easy ARC-AGI-1 tasks that o3 can't solve, and we have early indications that ARC-AGI-2 will remain extremely challenging for o3. This shows that it's still feasible to create unsaturated, interesting benchmarks that are easy for humans, yet impossible for AI -- without involving specialist knowledge. We will have AGI when creating such evals becomes outright impossible.

Here are images of some of the tests that were done:

https://preview.redd.it/gzevpwz2528e1.jpg?width=1644&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=75cf80889d88747cd2ed8ac41b5c933640ba5ee2

https://preview.redd.it/b3mfd6w5528e1.jpg?width=1662&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c560b6b9bbfc81635ab1e9eb06d4008285ceb68d

https://preview.redd.it/2ynfvqm9528e1.jpg?width=1002&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=24ec6127b935558bc34f73c3d3225170a4d3b87e

Here are ARC-AGI's testing data used for all tested models, including OpenAI's o3: https://github.com/arcprizeorg/model_baseline/tree/main/results

Blogpost about results: https://arcprize.org/blog/oai-o3-pub-breakthrough

I am very surprised about these results and that this was achieved at the end of 2024. I cannot wait to see what AI breakthroughs will happen next year.

How AI Killed the Internet

Im genuinly curious, and just want to hear the other side of the story really. My point is that drawn art takes a long time to make and I feel proud after I put so much work into it like it makes me happy. Do people who use AI feel that too? I have so many questions.

When I was in my senior year of university, learning programming presented many difficulties. For instance, sometimes a single error would require extensive searching before I could find a solution. But now, with the advent of various AI tools, some of which possess remarkable reasoning abilities, I believe AI can greatly assist us in learning a wide range of skills.

Many people may have numerous questions about this. The first question is: with the presence of powerful AI systems that surpass the capabilities of ordinary people, do we still need to learn? I think the answer to this question is simple. For example, if you ask an AI to prove a mathematical theorem or modify a complex codebase, you would still need human experts to verify the results before you can confidently accept them. Moreover, sometimes, if you don’t have a deep understanding of a field, you won’t be able to ask the right questions.

Additionally, if we rely too much on AI without learning anything ourselves, we would essentially be handing our fate over to the AI companies. This would undoubtedly lead to a dystopia. Some might ask, since we can ask AI anything, what is the point of summarizing knowledge? In my experience, if you don’t make a conscious effort to memorize knowledge, you will find it difficult to handle complex questions when you consult AI next time. Furthermore, if we take the knowledge we acquire—whether from AI or the internet—and organize it in detail, I believe this will accelerate the spread of technology and lead to a better world.

In my sophomore year, I came across an article about the application of computational physics in visual effects, and from then on, I embarked on the path of computational physics. Now, with the help of powerful AI, I can learn C++ programming much more quickly. However, I’ve also noticed that AI performs poorly in some areas with insufficient data, such as concurrent programming and high-performance computing.

I plan to continue studying advanced programming, mathematics, and physics. (Currently, advanced topics like differential geometry and real algebraic geometry and gauge field theory have been applied in areas such as 3D grid generation, solving nonlinear problems, and modeling complex physical phenomena, like fracture in phase transition processes. I believe this knowledge can certainly contribute to the development of visual effects.) With the aid of AI, I can accelerate my learning process.

I want to compile all these knowledge, carefully format them, and offer my perspectives. In this way, I hope to make a small contribution to the democratization of knowledge.HaHa

An ai-user trying to claim the artistic credit for creating an image is like a human Chess player trying to claim the credit for beating a world champion just because they happened to be nearby when Alpha Zero beat them or because they're the one who switched it on at the wall.

I see too many posts here starting with "As a professional artist, I think that..." but that's such a pointless brag. A homeless person doesn't start every sentence with "As a junkie homeless person..." if he wants to sound smart, so why are these bottom-of-society artists using their (former) occupation as some kind of brag?

Think about it, so many whining artists are suddenly out of jobs now, many of them have a partner simply because they've been b3tabuxxing with their steady salary, but now that their smug salary is dried up, their wifes/GFs are furious why they married a stupid loser instead of an intelligent crypto investor.

Mark my words, this is the golden time to slide in and make a move on them

It's not that long ago that knifesmiths, cartwrights, cloth-makers and sign writers were a common sight. I have a few hand-made knives in fact. They're really cool, but society has decided that the vast majority of us gains more than we lose if we have access to affordable mass-produced knives. Those may not be as nice, personal or creative as others, but they allow us to spend our resources, time and workforce on other things or to have more freetime. This process - automatizationreplacing the low-end mass market of a manual profession - has existed for as long as humanity exists, and it happens regularly since the beginning of industrialization.

My take is: AI art taking over parts of the market share of real artists are no different from this, and by extension, the notion that it is is either understandable personal bias or flatout snobbery. I have all the sympathy in the world for people who hold their profession or their products dear and see it getting replaced within their lifetime - but that doesn't mean the world owes them to keep it profitable artificially (no pun intended) through moralizing against its automatization. There have been types of art that have become less prominent or even redundant before. As an anecdote, see this poster from 1920's Germany from musicians protesting against sound films because it killed the silent film orchestral accompaniment - "sound film is economic and intellectual/spiritual murder!"

I usually hear three arguments against this. The first is that art is different from other professions because of its creative nature or cultural meaning, which really proves my point because there's literally nothing objective about this. Who says that art is more culturally significant than, say, engineering, or more creative than a hairdresser's job? It's as legit of an opinion as anything else. You wouldn't move a finger to keep these jobs alive if they were replaced or required less workforce because of automatization.

The second argument usually boils down to quality concerns, as in: AI shouldn't be used because the end result will look cheap. Which is arguably completely true, but still a matter of one's personal requirements, taste and resources. On a more societal scale, it is claimed that using AI contributes to the impoverishment of the art we in general get to see, and that's where we're back at the question about the cultural value of art versus other professions.

Lastly, see comment.

I don’t intend to do it, purely because I think the majority of people making these threats are essentially children or adults who have yet to grow up, but has anybody actually reported this sort of threat to the authorities?

It’s a threat, let’s be clear here, and should be taken seriously. It’s no different to someone saying ‘Kill postal workers’ or ‘Kill the gays’, especially if used in conjunction to a response to a piece of media or art and there are violent extremists actively recruiting in anti-ai spaces.

Just wondering…

“Everyone can be super! And when everyone’s super…

No one will be!”

As technology advances, we're seeing more and more AI-generated art flooding social media, galleries, and even art auctions. While I don't deny the technical skill behind AI's ability to generate visually impressive works, I firmly believe AI art doesn't deserve to be considered true art. Why? Because it lacks soul.

Art, in its purest form, is a deeply human experience. It’s not just about the final product; it’s about the emotions, the struggles, and the stories behind the creation. When an artist picks up a brush, chisel, or pen, they pour their thoughts, experiences, and struggles into the work. Every stroke, every decision, reflects part of their soul. This human touch is what gives art its power—its ability to move, to provoke, and to inspire. It connects us to the artist and to each other.

AI, on the other hand, is a tool. It can combine patterns, replicate styles, and even innovate to a certain extent, but it doesn't have intentions, emotions, or personal experiences. The algorithms behind AI art are devoid of the context that makes human art so impactful. There’s no life lived, no story told through the brushstrokes, no struggle or triumph that led to the piece. It’s a machine that creates based on input, without any emotional or personal investment in the outcome.

Critics might argue that AI art is just a new medium for creative expression, and that the artist who guides the AI should still be credited. But in my view, the act of creation is not just about shaping the output—it’s about the process, the journey, and the emotional connection with the work. When an AI generates a piece of art, it’s essentially the result of a series of mathematical calculations, not an emotional or intellectual endeavor. There’s no spirit behind it.

Yes, AI art can be aesthetically pleasing, but that doesn’t make it art. A beautiful image is not necessarily a profound one. True art challenges us, makes us think, and connects us to something greater than ourselves. AI lacks the ability to communicate this deeper meaning.

In the end, AI art is a product of human ingenuity, but it’s not human creativity. Art, at its core, is about soul. Without it, what we’re left with is just a pretty picture. Okay real post starts here.

I left this place probably 4 or 5 years ago.. I worked on my skills, made some money and my investments took off so I got extremely wealthy. Yeah I got a little lucky and It took a bit of effort, it helps to have a ridiculously high IQ of course. I still make art as a hobby. It's a fun passtime. I never could understand why people would want to make art for money. You probably don't remember me calling you all midwit dipshits at this point, but sorry about that anyways. No hard feelings, I can't remember what the arguments were about now anyways, oh well.

I come back for a brief moment now for my victory lap. My life is awesome now and I wanted to thank you guys for helping me quit social media. After I saw how braindead this community was it really blackpilled me on humanity and the merits of debate in general, so quitting was easy.

I see the usual suspects still here like meng, tyler, and the others. Are you guys okay? Are you guys seriously still writing book long posts about the same boring shit half a decade later, yikes. You know you can still get off this website and fix your lives, right? Maybe take this as your wakeup call, I don't know. Anyways I didn't intend to stay here long, I have a great life now to live. I guess this is goodbye forever this time. Well, bye lmao. ✌️ Real post ends here.

At its core, art is an expression of the human condition—our emotions, thoughts, struggles, and dreams. Whether it’s a painting, a song, or a sculpture, art reflects the experiences of the creator. An artist doesn’t just create for the sake of making something beautiful; they create to communicate something deeply personal. It might be a feeling of joy, sorrow, or a social message they want to convey. This connection between the artist and the audience is what makes art impactful and meaningful.

AI, by definition, doesn’t experience life. It doesn’t have emotions or a sense of self. It doesn’t create with intent, purpose, or personal meaning. Instead, AI generates images based on data sets, patterns, and algorithms. It can replicate existing art styles or even create new combinations, but it doesn’t feel what it’s making. It’s not responding to the world or its own experiences. It simply processes information in a way that mimics human creativity.

Furthermore, art requires authenticity. The value of an artwork comes from knowing that it was created by a person who invested themselves into the process—someone who faced challenges, took risks, and made choices along the way. AI art, on the other hand, is generated by a machine that has no personal investment in the work. There’s no journey, no struggle, and no discovery in the creation of AI art. It’s just a product of a machine, a copy of patterns, and at the end of the day, there’s no “artist” behind it.

Some might say that using AI is simply another tool, like a paintbrush or camera, and that the artist controlling the AI should still be credited. But to me, that argument misses the point. Tools like paintbrushes or cameras still require a human to guide them with vision, emotion, and intention. With AI, the human element becomes far more passive—it's just about choosing inputs and tweaking settings rather than the active, personal engagement that defines traditional artistry.

Finally, AI art doesn’t create culture. It doesn’t shape society. Human artists challenge norms, question ideologies, and create works that define and reflect their time. AI art can’t do this because it doesn’t have a relationship with the world. It simply mimics. True art is a conversation between the artist and the world, and AI, devoid of any real understanding, cannot participate in this dialogue.

AI art might look good on a canvas, but it lacks the depth and the human element that makes art truly powerful. It’s time we recognize that true art isn’t just about how something looks—it’s about what it says, who it’s from, and the story behind it. AI can replicate beauty, but it can’t create meaning.

I've run into this over and over in this sub, and frankly this isn't even as unhinged as it gets, but I thought I should point out the trend.

Here's an anti-AI extremist literally "both sides"-ing photography being an art form:

Some photographers are undoubtedly better than others but whether or not the better ones are elevated to the status of artists is a separate argument. Photography is in the grey area of the philosophy of art with arguments about whether it's art or not existing on both sides and many people believing it is.

Just to be clear, art programs in prestigious art colleges have been dedicated to photography for longer than anyone in this sub has been alive. Museum and gallery exhibits of fine art photography have been around for longer than anyone in this sub has been alive.

And yet, here we are, with the anti-AI crowd resorting to denying all of that history and clinging to the idea that the techniques THEY learned for realizing their creative vision are the only acceptable way. It's a form of conservative traditionalism that ALWAYS fails in the long run, but they're here for it. :-/

Hi there,

I hope this message finds you well!

Im looking to connect with people in this sub reddit that are innovative and working in on or with Ai that have an interest in having a positive impact on the world.

If this is you. I would love to connect with you!

Feel free to comment what you're working on or shoot me a dm!

Have a great day :)

More loading screens got added which used to just be a black static screen. However they were all immediately tore apart over the last few days about the potential for AI.

It's still unconfirmed whether they are or not. But the company has removed them likely forever just to get away from witch hunters.

Barely any of the rest of the update has been talked about.

Even AI can make some good codes, we should use AI to learn more programming, even o1 can beat almost all people in math, we should utilize this to learn more advanced math, if we abandon learning and fully rely on AI, then we will be easily be controlled

I think it's an interesting topic to discuss.

Here are few factors that in my opinion contributed to the temperature of discussion that surrounds this technology:

Commercial AI applications in many domains were developed very rapidly in the eyes of general public.

Behind the scenes research was steadily progressing since the end of AI winter in early 2000's. But before 2022 machine learning and AI was, at least in my perception, a topic discussed amongst a much more narrow population of experts and enthusiast. Then in 2022, seemingly everything came out at once, capable language models, image generators, music generators, deep fakes, voice cloning, 3D generation, and now video generation. This can be seen on google trends. Before 2021 the interest in the term "AI" is quite steady and it started growing at the end of 2021 which is also when ChatGPT was released.

2020-2022 was a really rough time in general.

We had a global pandemic, lockdowns, more political polarization, introduction of new and more addictive platforms such as TikTok and more. I think it is not just me who was really tired by the state of the world and wanted more stability after those two years. Then, right at that moment we got:

• A possibility that within a decade or two the whole job market, is going to be turned upside down and most of jobs may just be gone or at least changed in a very significant way.
• A possibility that social media is going to be flooded with fake news indistinguishable from real news,
• Warnings that unaligned AI may run away and destroy the world within a few decades.

Cost of living and anticorporate moods are on the rise.

In a lot of places the picture is the same: income and wealth inequalities are rising, housing cost is rising, prices of almost everything are rising. At the same time the corporations and elites are seen hoarding more and more wealth (quite right in many cases) and government is seen as corrupt and not doing it's job. And then you get capable AI which in theory brings the possibility of replacing many jobs, improving productivity (so you don't need as many workers to do the given job) and producing enormous amounts of wealth.

Do you think If we got this tech more slowly (for example one domain at a time) and in more economically and politically stable times, the discussion would be less polarized?

How did those factors influenced your perception of the AI?

Are there any additional factors which influenced the opinion of AI?

I want to learn many programming and write some technical blogs and I find out that AI can greatly accelerate the process of summarization and organization of knowledge, I think if I use AI, will it reduce the value of my blog

Hi everyone. I'm sure you're doing more/less alright

First of all, I this morning I check my whatsapp messages like usual, and noticed a new "feature" on the interface

A new button that just hovers there, putting the AI just more in your face than usual!

So I tried to ask the machine how to make this go away.

I Hate This On Such A Deep Level.

This is what followed

https://preview.redd.it/tzc6861yas7e1.png?width=738&format=png&auto=webp&s=42246fe073080cbe0aceeaedb341325869d4c9fc

https://preview.redd.it/vygpygbzas7e1.png?width=738&format=png&auto=webp&s=f7fe40226c5eedd7fc8b1e3bf00c4e207b28eef8

https://preview.redd.it/0d5565e2bs7e1.png?width=1169&format=png&auto=webp&s=f51b4a25d4575da0b48f15901d2998867f978d3c