Of the predictions I read, I found that the author engages in pretty heavy handed rules lawyering in order to make their predictions accurate.

For example, the author takes the stance that current self driving cars (Waymo, Zoox) do not count as self driving. The justification being that a human operator is involved some small fraction of the time.

By law, Waymo must report disengagements in California. In 2024, Waymo had ~10 thousand miles driven per disengagement, Zoox had ~28 thousand miles driven per disengagement [1]. I would say that this rate of human intervention qualifies as self driving.

[1] https://thelastdriverlicenseholder.com/2025/02/03/2024-disen...

> By late 2024 the biggest numbers that had been factored by an actual digital quantum computer had 35 bits (citing https://arxiv.org/pdf/2410.14397v1 )

This is incorrect. The cited reference says "N <= 35". That N is the number being factored, not the number of bits in the number. Also, footnote a of that paper points out (correctly) that the circuits that were used likely needed knowledge of the factors to create (e.g. as explained in https://arxiv.org/abs/1301.7007 ). As far as I know, only N=15 has been factored on a quantum computer in a no-shenanigans way.

It's conceivable that current ion trap machines could do a no-shenanigans N=21.... but anyone judging progress in quantum computing by largest-number-factored is looking at the wrong metric (for now). You won't see that metric move meaningfully until quantum error correction is done spinning up.

Reading the comments here about lawyering to make the prediction seems accurate, I have to say for me the value of prediction is not firstly about its binary accuracy, but more about the insights I get from the prediction and adjustment process. As our language is always limited, putting everything in a binary yes/no will almost always result in some dissatisfaction. We learn never much from binary values but from the gray values and how we must change our judgements to adapt. Perhaps that’s why punishment can cause a reaction but not deep learning and good educators always strive for insights and self-correction.

Useful predictions should also not in black or white but should be presented with an uncertainty, percentage of confidence if one can. It helps one to adjust ones prediction and confidence when new facts come along and I argue every serious predictors should do that.

Related. Others?

Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42651275 - Jan 2025 (185 comments)

Rodney Brooks Predictions Scorecard - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34477124 - Jan 2023 (41 comments)

Predictions Scorecard, 2021 January 01 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25706436 - Jan 2021 (12 comments)

Predictions Scorecard - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18889719 - Jan 2019 (4 comments)

My Dated Predictions - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16078431 - Jan 2018 (50 comments)

"2. Self Driving Cars. In the US the players that will determine whether self driving cars are successful or abandoned are #1 Waymo (Google) and #2 Zoox (Amazon). No one else matters. The key metric will be human intervention rate as that will determine profitability." - I love that he's not mentioning the speculation company of the century. We don't have to mention it either.

What’s even crazier is those fringe ideas from back in the day now have the compute power to actually execute as designed and really interesting things emerged.

I feel like we are on the verge of it, some say we already had it, but the singularity where hardware, learning, software, sensors and vision, all collide with enough headroom to make real-time our time. Now if we could only solve for our monkey brains.

So the shor's on real qc is still only 35.

Flying cars are nearly ready. That prediction of it not happening until 2036 is going to be set false the soonest. Alef Aero cars just started manufacturing.

https://www.flyingmag.com/california-firm-first-flying-car-p...

Prediction markets are superior for this stuff since one isn't self-evaluating and most prediction outcome evaluation is dominated by self-identity.

>Yes, I did say that something new and big that everyone accepted as the new and big thing in AI would come along no earlier than 2023 [...]

Lol, what a joke. I'd rather get someone to read my hand and tell me what's going to happen.

- Vulcano from Canary Island erupting

- Another one from Italy too

- Weird space event

- Odd geometry based discovery on Cosmologics

- Also, DNA's codons' layout will have something to say too

- Rust on Linux takes over Intel iGPU drivers (sadly). Tons of Linux distros either get OpenBSD's Xenocara or NetBSD's base X.org to get stuff working.

- Trump is impeached and declared mentally challenged due to an age related dementia in order to avoid prison time (and to avoid a global economy crash).