In my view we have a few different tiers of verifiability 1) programatically verifiable (near-free) - games, coding, math, cybersecurity, chip design 2) real-world verifiable (cost-or time bounded) - sciences: biology, chemistry, physics -physical world: material science, energy, aerospace, robotics, agriculture, pharma -forecasting: trading, weather 3) verifiable with human preference - writing, design, comedy, charisma, persuasion I expect most low-hanging fruit in (1) to be solved very quickly. Not sure how much longer before more solved math conjectures are simply uninteresting. I’m least certain about chip design being in this category, perhaps we hit a ceiling and require physics or materials breakthroughs to continue progress. My guess is we will quickly run into the limits of how well we can simulate each domain in (2). The time-bounded nature of real world verification may be the reason we don’t hit fast takeoff. Sim2real remains an elusive problem to solve when real-world data is limited. Part of the reason I don’t expect to live multiple hundreds of years is simply that I expect pharmaceutical progress to be time-bounded by the physical world. I expect the items in (3) to never really get solved to a superhuman degree, as success relies on an ever-shifting plane of cultural preference. People adapted to “good” AI writing and became annoyed at new stylistic tics that, in a vacuum, are not necessarily bad.