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

Ask HN: Is anyone else getting AI fatigue?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 379 posts

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone else getting AI fatigue?

#301

Post by Joker_vD »

brookst wrote: post #229
Joker_vD wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Copilot is amazing for reducing the tedium of typing obvious but lengthy code (and strings!) Which it occasionally mistypes. Then you're off to chase a small piece of error in a tub of boilerplate. Great stuff! For actual example, see [0] [0] https://blog.ploeh.dk/2022/12/05/github-copilot-preliminary-...

You must be a much better programmer than I if those are examples you’d use copilot for. I was thinking more like: start_value = get_*start_value(user_input)* self.log.d*ebug(‘got start_value {start_value}’)* . . . where the would-be italics are what copilot would likely suggest for completion. And if it’s wrong, you just. . . keep typing. It’s autocomplete, just like IDEs have for other things. I’m kind of astounded…

That's not my blog, I just thought the example to be relevant.

> I was thinking more like:

That example is straight up from any of those "programming is not bound by typing speed" essays of yore.

> people have such an emotional reaction to an optional, low-key, passive, easily-ignored tool that sometimes saves a bunch of typing.

Maybe because it's not generally advertised by proponents as "an optional, low-key, passive, easily-ignored tool that sometimes saves a bunch of typing"? Just look at the rest of the thread, it's pronounced as a game-changer in productivity.

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone else getting AI fatigue?

#302

Post by EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK »

Timwi wrote: post #284
EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But will it? After accounting for the time needed to fix all the bugs it introduces?

Humans introduce bugs too. ChatGPT is still new, so it probably makes more mistakes than a human at the moment, but it's only a matter of time until someone creates the first language model that will measurably outperform humans in this regard (and several other important regards).

>> it's only a matter of time

That reminds me how in my youth many were planning on vacations to Mars resorts and unlimited fusion energy) Stars looked so close, only a matter of time!

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone else getting AI fatigue?

#303

Post by danaris »

sfpotter wrote: post #41
dual_dingo wrote: post #32

The "I" in AI is just complete bullshit and I can't understand why so many people are in a awe of a bit of software that chains words to another based on some statistical model. The sad truth is that ChatGPT is about as good an AI as ELIZA was in 1966, it's just better (granted: much better) at hiding its total lack of actual human understanding. It's nothing more than an expensive parlor trick, IMHO. Github CoPilot?…

“AI” isn’t bull shit, it’s correctly labeled. It’s intelligence which is artificial: i.e. fake, ersatz, specious, not genuine… It’s our fault for not just reading the label. (I absolutely agree with your post and your viewpoint, just to be clear!)

The intention of the "artificial" in "AI" is not that particular meaning of "artificial", but the one for "constructed, man-made"—see meaning #1 in the Wiktionary definition[0]; the one you are using is #2.

It is often frustrating that English has words with such different (but clearly related) definitions, as it can make it far too easy to end up talking past each other.

[0] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/artificial

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone else getting AI fatigue?

#304

Post by [deleted] »

wongarsu wrote: post #136
5350-uiop-1130 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ChatGPT, when provided with a synthetic prompt is reliably a synthesizer, or to use the loaded term, a bullshiter. sounds like most people tbf

There are people who in many situations use as much critical though as ChatGPT does. ChatGPT isn't as good as a human who puts in a lot of effort, but in many jobs it can easily outperform humans who don't care very much.

[deleted]

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone else getting AI fatigue?

#305

Post by tuxracer »

axilmar wrote: post #27

Absolutely not. It seems too exciting to me and I am eager to see more AI. It's fascinating stuff.

Happy to find a fellow soul. I'm fatigued of the complaints of AI fatigue - especially where the complaints aren't based on recent (last year or so) first hand use.

It's bold (to put kindly) how lengthy some of these critical comments are from folks who later in the thread admit to not personally used Copilot (for example) much themselves.

The quality of LLM output can wildly vary based on what prompts (or series of prompts) are used.

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone else getting AI fatigue?

#306

Post by RamblingCTO »

EForEndeavour wrote: post #75
RamblingCTO wrote: post #12

I had that since I was doing my masters in data science (5 years ago?). I love the models, the statistics and just the cleverness of everything but I just can't stand the "scene" anymore and moved almost entirely away from it. It's not as exciting as it was anymore. When I started with the topic I watched a documentary with Joseph Weizenbaum ([1]) and felt weirded out that someone would step away from such an interes…

you mentioned you moved almost entirely from the AI / data science "scene." Where did you move to?

Being a CTO (doing manager stuff), regular coding. By moving away I also meant I don't follow along anymore and don't contribute to the projects I did so in the past. I just lost interest.

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone else getting AI fatigue?

#307

Post by rchaud »

FrustratedMonky wrote: post #280
britch wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with LLM in my view is that they're capped at what already exists. Using them for "creative" things, is that they can parrot things back in the statistically average way, or maybe attempt to echo it in an existing style. Copilot cannot use something because it prefers it, or thinks it's better than what's common. It can only repeat what is currently popular (and will likely be self reenforced over time) W…

All artists of every stripe have studied other art, have practiced what has come before, and have influences. What do you think they do in art school; they copy what came before. The old masters had understudies, that learned a style. Is it not an old saying in art that ‘there is nothing original’. Everything was based on something. Humans are also regurgitating what they ‘inputted’ to their brain. For programming, i…

> Why if an AI does it (copy paste), it is somehow now a lesser accomplishment than when a human does it.

Because the kind of 'art' the AI will create will end up in a Canva template; it will be clip art for the modern Powerpoint or Facebook ad. Because corporations like Canva are the only ones that will pay the fees to use these tools at scale. And all they produce is marketing detritus, which is the opposite of art.

Instead of the "Corporate Memphis" art style that's been run into the ground by every big tech company, AI will produce similarly bland, corporate-approved graphics that we'll continue to roll our eyes at.

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone else getting AI fatigue?

#308

Post by codeptualize »

Shinchy wrote: post #270
codeptualize wrote: post #24

I'm working on a project that uses GPT-3 and similar stuff, even before the hype. I think the overhype is really tiring. Just like with most of these hype cycles there is an actual useful interesting technology, but the hype beasts take it way overboard and present it as if it's the holy grail or whatever. It's not. That's tiring, and really annoying. It's incredibly cool technology, it is great at certain use cases,…

> I'm kinda worried AI will get a scam/shitty product connotation I think we're already there. A legion of AI based startups seem to be coming out daily ( https://www.futuretools.io/ ) that offer little more than gimmicks.

You are probably right, kinda sad.

My last resort is to just remove all AI references from my marketing and just deliver the product.

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone else getting AI fatigue?

#309

Post by notacoward »

haswell wrote: post #158
FrustratedMonky wrote: post #103

Engineers are always building things that are incredible, then turning their back on it as ordinary once the problem is solved, “oh that’s so normal, it was just a little math, a little tweak, no big deal”. AI has gone through a lot of stages of “only X can be done by a human”-> “X is done by AI” -> “oh, that’s just some engineering, that’s not really human” or “no longer in the category of mystical things we can’t e…

I generally agree that we quickly adjust to new tech and forget how impactful it is. But I can’t fully get on board with this: > but how is re-enforcement “Learning”, not exactly the same as reading books to a toddler and pointing at a picture and having them repeat what it is? Start digging into the human with the same engineering view, and suddenly it also just become a bunch of parts. Where is the human in the hum…

> the underlying results of that learning (and the process of learning itself) could not be any more different

To drill down a bit, I think the difference is that the child is trying to build a model - their own model - of the world, and how symbols describe or relate to it. Eventually they start to plan their own way through life using that model. Even though we use the term "model" that's not at all what a neural-net/LLM type "AI" is doing. It's just adjusting weight to maximize correlation between outputs and scores. Any internal model is vague at best, and planning (the also-incomplete core of "classical" AI before the winter) is totally absent. That's a huge difference.

ChadGPT is really not much more than ELIZA (1966) on fancy hardware, and it's worth noting that Eliza's was specifically written to illustrate superficiality of (some) conversation. Its best known DOCTOR script was intentionally a parody of Rogerian therapy. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone else getting AI fatigue?

#310

Post by weeksie »

mlboss wrote: post #276
weeksie wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I almost always turn autocomplete off except in circumstances where the API has bad documentation. I also found that copilot was an aggravation more than a help after using it for a couple weeks.

We programmers enjoy writing code. We derive satisfaction when a code is perfect and elegant. But its going to end very soon. Artists are freaking out because things that takes them days to create now only take 2 seconds. We are next. The writing is on the wall. Programming as we know it is going to end. We should be embracing these tools and should start moving from software developers to software architects role.

I don't think you're getting what I'm saying. I'm _faster_ without autocomplete
Post reply on HN