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

361–370 of 379 posts

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

#361

Post by dennis_jeeves1 »

brookst wrote: post #132
rcme wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I’m sick of AI products, I’m even more sick of the “ChatGPT is bullshit” argument.

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

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

Well, I'm no fan of chatGPT. But it appears most people are worse than chatGPT, because just regurgitate what they hear with no thought or contemplation. So you can't really blame average folks who struggle with the concepts of intelligence/understanding that you mention.

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

#362

Post by FridgeSeal »

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…

Same here, didn’t do a masters, but worked as a data scientist for a good while.

> I love the models, the statistics and just the cleverness of everything but I just can't stand the "scene" anymore

This really sums up my feelings too.

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

#363

Post by EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK »

rsynnott wrote: post #333
Timwi wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 until someone creates the first language model that will measurably outperform humans in this regard This seems to have been the rallying cry of AI-ish stuff for the past 30 years, tho. At a certain point you have to ask "but how much time"? Like, a lot of people were confidently predicting speech recognition as good as a human's from the 90s on, for instance. It's 2023, and the state of…

Anyone still remembers the self-driving hype?

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

#364

Post by FridgeSeal »

rchaud wrote: post #322
not_a_shill wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think every day office jobs and try to figure out where you can use it as a productivity multiplier. You can figure out Microsoft's next step from there.

I'd be interested to know what productivity areas Microsoft identified before launching Teams.

“Quick, figure out how to make the corpse of Skype even worse!”

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

#366

Post by carlosjobim »

FrustratedMonky wrote: post #296
carlosjobim wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The human is computation also, unless you believe in souls or other worldly mysticism. I think it is incredibly sad that a person can be reduced to believing humans don't have souls. Do something different with yourself so you can discover the miracle of life. If you don't believe there is anything more to people and to the world than mechanical processes, I would challenge you to do a powerful spiritual activity.

By spiritual practice, do you mean something like studying the Skanda's or the 5 Aggregates? Or do you mean to open myself to the love of our lord and savior? It does make a difference in how you approach the world if your spiritual practice encourages insight, or if you are blinded by faith in a spiritual entity that is directing you.

A powerful spiritual practice like challenging your own limits and fears to the maximum, or meditation and fasting, or immersing yourself in a completely different environment from what you are familiar with until you know it truly. Or if these things sound too abstract, to take a strong dose of psychedelics alone or with others.

Religious texts are something that can be interesting after sensing some spirituality, but probably not before. I don't think anybody who is not spiritual can become so by reading religious texts.

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

#367

Post by carlosjobim »

QuadmasterXLII wrote: post #251
carlosjobim wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The human is computation also, unless you believe in souls or other worldly mysticism. I think it is incredibly sad that a person can be reduced to believing humans don't have souls. Do something different with yourself so you can discover the miracle of life. If you don't believe there is anything more to people and to the world than mechanical processes, I would challenge you to do a powerful spiritual activity.

What is a powerful spiritual activity you’d recommend?

I'm pasting my response from above:

A powerful spiritual practice like challenging your own limits and fears to the maximum, or meditation and fasting, or immersing yourself in a completely different environment from what you are familiar with until you know it truly. Or if these things sound too abstract, to take a strong dose of psychedelics alone or with others.

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

#368

Post by BulgarianIdiot »

NobleLie wrote: post #159
BulgarianIdiot wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“It’s just statistics” is an evergreen way to dismiss AI. The problem is you’re also just statistics.

Source for consciousness / intelligence to be "statistics"? I don't think there is any because there is no functional model for what organic intelligence is or how it operates. There are plethora of fascinating attempts / models but only a subset implore that it is solely "statistical". And even if it was statistical, the implementation of the wet system is absolutely not like a gigantic list of vectorized (stripped…

Look at how Microsoft is instructing GPT to become "Sydney" and re-evaluate your opinions about what is intelligence:

https://twitter.com/marvinvonhagen/status/162365814434901197...

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

#369

Post by p0w3n3d »

From my side there are three feelings that fight in me: 1. it's incredible how this AI performs drawing and writing 2. will it take my programmers work? 3. what if this AI makes a mistake?

I think putting AI inside everything will give us opportunity to experience first-hand what is a local extremum of multidimensional function and how it differs from global extremum. Our paper gets eliminated because some AI-based curriculum vitae review glitch. Our car lost a wheel because computer vision failed (or lose our heads like that one owner of Tesla )... Most scary for me is that we are starting to build more and more things of which we wouldn't be able to understand the inner workings. Hence there might be an intelligence crisis creeping slowly into our civilisation, and then bam... like in Andrzej Zajdel's Van Troff's Cylinder

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

#370

Post by [deleted] »

barrell wrote: post #190
goolulusaurs wrote: post #130

There is a lot of negativity towards the idea of AI in this thread, and I feel like someone has to say it: it is quite likely that in the near future computers will be better than almost all humans at almost all cognitive tasks. If you have a task or are trying to accomplish something, and the way you do it is by moving a mouse around or typing on a keyboard then it is very likely that an AI will be able to do that t…

I think this sentiment that this will happen in the "near future" is the cause for exactly the sort of fatigue the author is talking about. If you mean in the next year or two, I hate to disappoint you, but barring some massive leap forward, you are going to be wrong. If you mean in the next hundred years, or maybe sometime in our lifetimes, sure. The chances it looks anything like chatGPT or GPT3 now though is laugh…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN