Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Let's Build AI

letsbuild.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 52 posts

Re: Show HN: Let's Build AI

#41

Post by jsdeveloper »

vouaobrasil wrote: post #9

I'm currrently re-reading Jurassic Park, and I can't help but wonder whether we are committing the same mistakes with AI as the scientists in the book... AI seems to be the ultimate example of "shoot first, ask questions later". We have no idea how AI will effect society, the marginal benefits to people are near-zero (measred in terms of the difference before any adoption to widespread adoption, not incremental inter…

The later we postpone the greater will be disaster.

Suppose we had this AI at the dawn of internet, we would have google using this tech to search internet back then. We would have saved countless hours of search to fix a bug.

AI is having an Einstein in our pocket. Any one who had to develop/research on any topic, he has an Einstein level assistance ready to help you out. We are just at the dawn of the sci-fi era we always have imagined for. And AI will be our companion in this fast changing world: "Jarvis explain me how that thing works" , and you get somewhat of an idea about any new or complex subject, which otherwise would have taken days to comprehend.

Re: Show HN: Let's Build AI

#42

Post by stanac »

zingar wrote: post #18
stanac wrote: post #2

Looks neat, kind of those "awesome X" list. Maybe adding a wiki would be interesting (so uninitiated can learn what is what and where to start if they want to build/train their own AI). Tangential question I am not sure where else to ask: Would it be possible to train AI at home on a book? I was thinking about how sometimes I start reading a book and then get distracted for a month or two. Summarizing chapters and ch…

Is privateGPT what you're looking for? It stores PDFs in a vector DB and answers questions based on that content alone. Edit: Everything is local. This is not training, it takes a standard LLM and gives it extra context based on what text the tool finds in the vector DB related to the topic. https://github.com/imartinez/privateGPT

That sounds even better than training LLM on my own. Thanks.

Re: Show HN: Let's Build AI

#43

Post by vouaobrasil »

npteljes wrote: post #40
vouaobrasil wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What you can decide is what part you want of it. Or, you can build a revolution to take it down...

I don't think that can happen. A revolution, and a new thing's concept are not in the same realm. Especially true if the thing has military implications. You just don't put that genie back to the bottle. Whatever do you, and I mean literally what ever, the thing will come to life. If it's socially acceptable, then the science magazines will hype about it, if not, it will be done in a laboratory that's not even on map…

We could take down the technological civilization, and institute methods more like the Amish...not saying it will happen like that but I mean that's certainly possible.

Re: Show HN: Let's Build AI

#44

Post by npteljes »

vouaobrasil wrote: post #43
npteljes wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that can happen. A revolution, and a new thing's concept are not in the same realm. Especially true if the thing has military implications. You just don't put that genie back to the bottle. Whatever do you, and I mean literally what ever, the thing will come to life. If it's socially acceptable, then the science magazines will hype about it, if not, it will be done in a laboratory that's not even on map…

We could take down the technological civilization, and institute methods more like the Amish...not saying it will happen like that but I mean that's certainly possible.

I see no reason why all people would be on board, and so, I don't think that this is an angle that is worthy of exploration. I feel like it's the same utopian, or draconian kind of thinking that failed when implemented countless times in history.

What you're right about is that we might try, nevertheless. I mean, we have things like the Geneva Convention or the United Nations, however debatable their effectiveness is. We wouldn't know unless we tried. But it's important to note that even though these things exist, violating them is always just an inch away. And then we're basically back to where I started: what you can decide is what part you want in the thing. But I don't think you can make the thing go away.

But I mean, it's not that I invented this myself. It's basically the concept of Pandora's box.

Re: Show HN: Let's Build AI

#47

Post by android521 »

hk__2 wrote: post #31
aprxi wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Author here. Thanks for asking. One key objective is not to be yet another linksite, but add utility by providing direct shortcuts to code, docs, api references etc. next to the main link.

> One key objective is not to be yet another linksite, but add utility by providing direct shortcuts to code, docs, api references etc. next to the main link. Is this a need people have? I would use letsbuild.ai to discover projects and check their homepage/documentation, but once I know a given project I know where to find its docs (or search for " docs" on Google).

don't underestimate the UX improvments from tiny friction removal features. It can become the difference between a site no one usess to a site everyone loves

Re: Show HN: Let's Build AI

#48

Post by vouaobrasil »

patwolf wrote: post #32
vouaobrasil wrote: post #9

I'm currrently re-reading Jurassic Park, and I can't help but wonder whether we are committing the same mistakes with AI as the scientists in the book... AI seems to be the ultimate example of "shoot first, ask questions later". We have no idea how AI will effect society, the marginal benefits to people are near-zero (measred in terms of the difference before any adoption to widespread adoption, not incremental inter…

Unfortunately another theme of Michael Crichton books is that because of human hubris and corporate greed, the disaster is inevitable. Regulation and scientific ethics don't matter because humans find a way. Although, maybe that's because it wouldn't make for a very interesting book if government regulation successfully prevented Hammond from experimenting with DNA.

> Unfortunately another theme of Michael Crichton books is that because of human hubris and corporate greed, the disaster is inevitable. Regulation and scientific ethics don't matter because humans find a way.

This is exactly what has happened with humanity.

Re: Show HN: Let's Build AI

#49

Post by pmarreck »

cnunciato wrote: post #24
pmarreck wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AI seems to be the ultimate example of "shoot first, ask questions later". We have no idea how AI will effect society You know, you say this, but we had massive changes after personal computers and the Internet and the iPhone became a thing, and no studies to my knowledge were produced before any of these things were introduced. All of the predicted effects were only positive, because only good actors were involved…

The obvious difference, though, is that you knowingly use all of these tools; you get to choose whether and how you use them. AI, like the weapons you point out, can invade your life without you knowing it even exists.

The same AI that invades my life to do harm can "invade" my life and be (extremely) helpful.

And the latter is more likely. Because the willpower of an AI is just the mimicked willpower of the people who made it, and there will always be more good people than bad people.

Re: Show HN: Let's Build AI

#50

Post by pmarreck »

monsieurbanana wrote: post #34
visarga wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's actually the other way around with AI. If you want to do web-search, you got to disclose your keywords to a search engine. If you want to post on social networks, you are in plain sight. If you use a mobile phone, you broadcast your location. But if you use your local models, it's more like running a linux box, it is private, customizable and unfiltered. LLMs will reverse the centralization trend we have seen wi…

The amount of people that will run their own models is negligible at the scale of the society. You also can't choose to cut yourself off from the bad outcomes, no matter how much you try. Propaganda 3.0 might not affect you directly, but the political outcomes it produces will.

> The amount of people that will run their own models is negligible at the scale of the society

Let me transpose your sentence back to 1980:

"The amount of people that will run their own computers is negligible at the scale of the society"

(I was 8 in 1980. People literally said this.)

All someone needs to do is to productize a whole-house LLM that does voice to text, runs the LLM, does text back to voice (possibly mimicking whatever voice you want), and you'd have an Alexa replacement that is far smarter. I'd buy it in a heartbeat just so that I wouldn't have to do maintenance on it.

Post reply on HN