---
description: There is an important distinction between a forecast and a task that has actually been solved.
url: https://www.schmalzl.tirol/en/blog/2025-09-07-ki-fortschritt-ueberpruefbare-schritte
lang: en
date: 2025-09-07
deutsch: /blog/2025-09-07-ki-fortschritt-ueberpruefbare-schritte.md
---

# Looking at AI progress in verifiable steps

_7 September 2025 · Archive date_

Conversations about AI quickly switch between two levels. On one is a concrete task that a tool does today. On the other is an idea of what might be possible in a few years. Both levels can be interesting, but they should stay distinguishable.

An impressive demonstration makes you curious. For your own assessment, it helps to translate its claim into a verifiable sentence.

## A small task as a yardstick

An invented example: "The tool finds two contradictory size details in a text I wrote myself." There is a known source text and an expected result. Whether the task succeeds can be observed.

"The tool will soon take over all planning" is a much bigger claim. It contains assumptions about new abilities, reliability and the conditions of later use. A single successful attempt does not prove these assumptions.

A sensible comparison can therefore look at several tasks of different difficulty. Failures are part of it too. They show where an extra explanation, a different tool or human checking is still needed.

## Looking at progress and responsibility together

Additional abilities bring new questions: Which steps may happen on their own? Which results can be checked? When does it have to stop? These limits can change with the task and should be described explicitly.

A forecast remains the assessment of its source. For my own blog, the concrete learning question is often more fruitful: what works in a clearly limited test, under which conditions and with which open points? That way you can follow a development closely without presenting an optimistic or pessimistic prediction as a settled course.

## Original finds

These links were the starting point for this post. The commentary in the text is mine; the linked posts are not my own tests.

- [Dario Amodei on AI progress and programming](<https://www.instagram.com/reel/DVjkIZ9FO-g/>)
- [Dario Amodei on AI progress and programming](<https://www.instagram.com/reel/DXHMhT0zcZU/>)
- [How fast should AI move forward?](<https://darioamodei.com/post/we-must-pace-the-frontier>)
- [Compilation of Ilya Sutskever's warnings and the opportunities of advanced AI; check the statements against the original source before a blog post.](<https://youtu.be/79-bApI3GIU>)
- [Post arguing that AI itself is not the most important skill for the future; the exact reasoning in the video is still open.](<https://www.instagram.com/reel/DWp2rDPDOG3/>)

> **About the date:** This post was written on 11 October 2026. The archive date corresponds to the earliest related find in the collection, not to a publication at that time. Technical context and sources added later refer to the time of writing.