I do not question for a second that Carmack is a computing genius, but “murky” is an understatement. There is nothing of technical, scientific or business value in this interview. It’s just generic words strung together.
Why do people think he is a computing genius? He read contemporary papers in computer 3D rendering and implemented well understood concepts in a shitty dev environment (early x86 and VGA systems). When I do that for my company, I'm just a junior dev.
People really need to stop with this "Great person" nonsense. He's a pretty smart coder, and is gifted with geometry and other fields of math. He's not a genius. He didn't "master" calculus at age 15 like Einstein, he didn't invent anything particularly new in the field. Why the obsession people have with him? Why should we look to him for AI questions? What evidence is there that he has any new knowledge?
> Why should we look to him for AI questions? What evidence is there that he has any new knowledge?
He covers this in the article. He doesn't. He's just trying stuff out with a different approach than others because he believes (and is probably correct) that there is a chance that the most efficient path forward to AGI isn't the work that OpenAI and others are doing.
Even socially, it fails to plumb the depths. Mr Carmack is taking a "different path" by ... reading the relevant literature and talking to YC? This is 100% mainstream - The difference is what?
