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

311–320 of 379 posts

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

#311

Post by codeptualize »

askiiart wrote: post #288
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,…

> 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. See also: Gartner hype cycle

Thanks! Very interesting. I guess our challenge will be surviving the inevitable dip.

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

#312

Post by britch »

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…

It's a fair point.

My concern is with the limitations in the creation of new styles.

I guess my view is that you send 100 people to art school and you get 100 different styles out of it (ok maybe 80).

With AI you've got a handful of dominant models instead of a unique model for each person based on life experience.

Apprentices learn and develop into a master. If that works is all moved to an LLM, where do the new masters come from?

---

I take your point about the technology. I have a hard time saying it's not impressive or similar to how humans learn.

My concern is more with what widespread adoption will mean

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

#313

Post by gptgpp »

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,…

Finally, a take on chatgpt and similar LLMs I agree with!

I've criticized it whenever it gets brought up as an alternative for academic research, coding, math, other more sophisticated knowledge based stuff. In my experience at least, it falls apart at reliably dealing with these and I haven't gone back.

But man, is it ever revolutionary at actually dealing with language and text.

As an example, I have a bunch of boring drama going on right now with my family, endless fucking emails while I'm trying to work.

I just paste them into chat gpt and get it to summarize them, and then I get it to write a response. The onerous safeguards make it so I don't have to worry about it being a dick.

Family has texted me about how kind and diplomatic I'm being and I honestly don't even really know what they're squabbling about, it's so nice!

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

#314

Post by evilduck »

exegete wrote: post #102
thejammahimself wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Github CoPilot? Great, now I have to perform the most mentally taxing part of developing software, namely understanding other people's code (or my own from 6 months ago...) while writing new code. I'm beyond thrilled ... I think there's an argument to be made that AI is being used here to help you tackle the more trivial tasks so you have more time to focus on the more important, and challenging tasks. Albeit I rec…

I think the parent’s comment is probably referring to the fact if you use Copilot to write code then you have to go through and try to understand what it wrote and possibly debug it. And you don’t have the opportunity to ask it why it wrote it the way it did when reviewing its code.

But it's trickling in small chunks at a time unless you are just smashing tab repeatedly and don't look at what it did until the very end. You can also not accept what it offers and just continue writing code for yourself. If a dev submitted a bunch of Copilot code they don't understand and can't answer questions about you reject the PR outright and they eventually realize it didn't save them any time or effort. Copilot isn't the employee.

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

#315

Post by hhjinks »

Timwi wrote: post #290
hhjinks wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To broadly be able to predict human speech you need to broadly be able to predict the human mind This is a non sequitur. The human mind does a whole lot more than string words together. Being able to predict which word would logically follow another does not require the ability to predict anything other than just that.

I think what the commenter is saying is that, in time, language models too will do a lot more than string words together. If it's large enough, and you train it well enough to respond to “what's the best next move in this chess position?” prompts with good moves, it will inevitably learn chess.

I don't think that follows, necessarily. Chess has an unfathomable amount of states. While the LLM might be able to play chess competently, I would not say it has learned chess unless it is able to judge the relative strength of various moves. From my understanding, an LLM will not judge future states of a chess game when responding to such a prompt. Without that ability, it's no different than someone receiving anal bead communications from Magnus Carlsen.

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

#316

Post by brookst »

Joker_vD wrote: post #301
brookst wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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, passi…

Different experiences, I guess. I’m a low end, part-time hobbyist programmer, and for me at least 75% of my time is spent essentially typing in obvious, easily-checked code. It has been a game changer for me. It’s also led me to write better comments, because rather than being a pure tax, they improve the generated code.

I can see how someone who’s always working on sophisticated, mentally challenging code would get less benefit and would see more frequent errors.

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

#317

Post by rchaud »

not_a_shill wrote: post #206
mattbrewsbytes wrote: post #189

Its the next hype train since the blockchain/crypto/nft's hype train. The crypto train has arrived at its overheated, decentralized set of train stations that all have remnants of fraudsters, high end GPU boxes scattered about, torn up flyers with the promise of untold riches, people scampering about in the shadows muttering "defi" to themselves, people getting carted off in handcuffs. Where will the AI hype train go…

>Its the next hype train since the blockchain/crypto/nft's hype train. It really isn't. The business use cases even with current tech are pretty obvious. The problem with crypto/blockchain stuff was that it was useless. An emperor with no clothes. Is there a more legitimate argument for why they're similar other than "hype" or am I missing something?

> Is there a more legitimate argument for why they're similar other than "hype" or am I missing something?

The tech industry runs on hype, so much so that analysts are told to evaluate them separately. Growth now, profit later, here's $2bn from Softbank, yada yada yada.

Companies like Theranos specifically positioned themselves as 'tech' so as to escape press scrutiny, particularly in sensitive industries like healthcare.

Emperors with no clothes can get very far; see Brian Armstrong and SBF (pre-collapse, but still not in jail). Can you imagine how far a well-funded AI hustler could get?

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

#318

Post by brookst »

narrator wrote: post #298
brookst wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest thing I’ve learned from chatGPT is that real people struggle with the difference between intelligence, understanding, and consciousness / sentience.

The most annoying thing to me is people thinking AI wants things and gets happy and sad. It doesn't have a mamailian or reptilian brain. It just holds a mirror up to humanity generally via matrix math and probability.

Well said. It is a mistake to anthropomorphize large language models; they really hate that.

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

#319

Post by pixl97 »

traceroute66 wrote: post #216
pixl97 wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Man, if this were 1800 you'd be stating that man would never fly and the horse would never be supplanted by the engine. I honestly don't believe you have any scientific or rational reasoning for the point you are attempting to make in your post, because if you were you'd be stating that animal intelligence is magical.

> Man, if this were 1800 you'd be stating that man would never fly and the horse would never be supplanted by the engine. I'm sorry, what sort of bullshit argument is that ? Flight and engines are both natural evolution using natural physics and mechanics. Artificial Intelligence is nothing but a square-peg-round-hole, when you have a sledgehammer everything looks like a nut scenario.

Flight and engines are natural evolution but intelligence is magic? Nature accomplished intelligence via random walk and it is a complicated mess because of it. To think that we cannot accomplish at least parts of intelligence is insane to me.

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

#320

Post by FrustratedMonky »

notacoward wrote: post #309
haswell wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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-n…

Why do we think that inside the 'weights' there is not a model? Where in the brain can you point and say 'there is the model'. The wiggly mass of neurons creates models and symbols, why do we assume that inside large neural nets the same thing isn't happening. When I see pictures of both (brain scan versus weights), they look pretty similar. Sorry I don't have latest citation, but was under assumption that the biggest breakthroughs in AI were around symbolic logic.
Post reply on HN