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

GPTs Are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of LLMs

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 235 posts

Re: GPTs Are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of LLMs

#41

Post by coldtea »

mojuba wrote: post #36
bulbosaur123 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was it GPT4 or GPT3.5? It spews less bullshit with each new iteration. Matter of time really.

I don't want to have a calculator (or say bookkeeping software) that gives correct results most of the time but not always, and then hear from the developers that it will get better with each iteration. I need a calculator that is correct 100% of time, not even 99.999%, because otherwise I can't rely on it at all. In other words, the utility of a calculator that is correct only 99% of time is zero, since you can't ev…

>I don't want to have a calculator (or say bookkeeping software) that gives correct results most of the time but not always

And yet Excel is widely popular, despite several footguns and inaccurate calculations!

Re: GPTs Are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of LLMs

#42

Post by coldtea »

dr_dshiv wrote: post #40
mojuba wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want to have a calculator (or say bookkeeping software) that gives correct results most of the time but not always, and then hear from the developers that it will get better with each iteration. I need a calculator that is correct 100% of time, not even 99.999%, because otherwise I can't rely on it at all. In other words, the utility of a calculator that is correct only 99% of time is zero, since you can't ev…

Don’t rely on floating point accuracy!

Those are predictably correct and incorrept, in a very formal way!

Re: GPTs Are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of LLMs

#43

Post by giuscri »

jalapenos wrote: post #24

I think more parallels should be drawn with what we were doing before: Googling it. Perhaps it's because ChatGPT seemed to happen much more suddenly than Google became a programming resource, but we're using them in much the same way. Asking for pre-made solutions, explanations, troubleshooting tips etc. ChatGPT just does the job way better. But no-one was worried Google would put knowledge workers out of a job.

In the last days I'm using ChatGPT as my first choice when searching for something and then googling if I'm not sure GPT is not hallucinating. Are they able to sustain the load?

Re: GPTs Are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of LLMs

#44

Post by coldtea »

geraneum wrote: post #9

> Our findings indicate that the importance of science and critical thinking skills are strongly negatively associated with exposure, suggesting that occupations requiring these skills are less likely to be impacted by current language models. Conversely, programming and writing skills show a strong positive association with exposure, implying that occupations involving these skills are more susceptible to being infl…

>Am I reading this correctly that the assumption here is that programming and writing skills aren't reliant on critical thinking

A lot of practical programming is cookie cutter work, and doesn't need much critical thinking. Thus "code monkeys".

Re: GPTs Are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of LLMs

#45

Post by mjburgess »

jalapenos wrote: post #24

I think more parallels should be drawn with what we were doing before: Googling it. Perhaps it's because ChatGPT seemed to happen much more suddenly than Google became a programming resource, but we're using them in much the same way. Asking for pre-made solutions, explanations, troubleshooting tips etc. ChatGPT just does the job way better. But no-one was worried Google would put knowledge workers out of a job.

Everything I've used ChatGPT for so far I could, more-or-less, have written or searched for myself in the time it took to get it out of chatgpt correctly. And I've often just had to rewrite it completely.

If you're an expert (writer, programmer, etc.) it's often faster to type it as-needed than modify chatgpt's output.

If you're not then either it's not reliable enough, since you do not have the expertise to modify; or the task is quite menial and you dont need reliability.

So it seems to me people are reacting to this based on wild assumptions about how it works and what "other people's jobs are". It don't see it being much more than a button in a few apps that makes some menial tasks 50% shorter.

People seem to be forgetting that in the vast majority of cases the thing ChatGPT is giving you is also available on stackoverflow, github, wikipeida, or 101 other high quality online sources.

Re: GPTs Are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of LLMs

#46

Post by wolpoli »

sirsinsalot wrote: post #29

I asked Chat GPT which antacid medications are contraindicated for some medication I'm on. Easily found through NICE. It made up a severe risk of death taking a very common medicine combo. It was super convincing, even giving information on how long to avoid taking them together. It was pure bullshit. I think as much as hyping the benefits we need to hype the flaws and dangers. If the public at large learn to trust t…

For this specific example, an LLM in front of NICE will produce the correct result. It's a matter of time before this case will be fixed.

From a non-expert's perspective through, an LLM is very dependable, unless it completely goes off the rail. How would anyone know when to trust it and when to be skeptical?

Re: GPTs Are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of LLMs

#47

Post by puzzledobserver »

karmasimida wrote: post #17
geraneum wrote: post #9

> Our findings indicate that the importance of science and critical thinking skills are strongly negatively associated with exposure, suggesting that occupations requiring these skills are less likely to be impacted by current language models. Conversely, programming and writing skills show a strong positive association with exposure, implying that occupations involving these skills are more susceptible to being infl…

Programming is an umbrella term. IMO, there are two types of programming work: 1. Specifying. You are working on getting all requirements, and laid out the specification of the expected behavior of a system. 2. Translating. Once the specification is a nailed down. It would be taken into the hands of translators and put into actual code. Both involves critical thinking, but translators probably more susceptible to LLM…

May I add "scheming" to your list of programming activities?

At the macro level, this would be system design. Making sure that the architecture is extensible, transparent to failures, and easy to understand and develop for.

At the micro level, this would involve coming up with clever algorithms to solve specific problems. In ways that are simple or efficient or parsimonious.

In any case, this scheming activity, which would slot in between the specifying and translating that you speak of, would involve deeply understanding both the specification (and how it might evolve) and computing substrate (its APIs, what is efficient and what is not, etc.). I might even call it some combination of wisdom and deviousness?

Re: GPTs Are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of LLMs

#48

Post by block_dagger »

mojuba wrote: post #36
bulbosaur123 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was it GPT4 or GPT3.5? It spews less bullshit with each new iteration. Matter of time really.

I don't want to have a calculator (or say bookkeeping software) that gives correct results most of the time but not always, and then hear from the developers that it will get better with each iteration. I need a calculator that is correct 100% of time, not even 99.999%, because otherwise I can't rely on it at all. In other words, the utility of a calculator that is correct only 99% of time is zero, since you can't ev…

Imagine a life or death situation where a calculation held the key. Would you rather use a calculator that is right 50% of the time or 99% of the time. The obvious choice highlights that the utility is not exactly zero. But I see your point.

Re: GPTs Are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of LLMs

#49

Post by malborodog »

sirsinsalot wrote: post #29

I asked Chat GPT which antacid medications are contraindicated for some medication I'm on. Easily found through NICE. It made up a severe risk of death taking a very common medicine combo. It was super convincing, even giving information on how long to avoid taking them together. It was pure bullshit. I think as much as hyping the benefits we need to hype the flaws and dangers. If the public at large learn to trust t…

This kind of problem is (trivially?) solvable through the ReAct framework, like LangChain etc. Basically you get good data, vector embed it, and make sure the LLM knows where to look for accurate information.

Re: GPTs Are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of LLMs

#50

Post by oytis »

monkeydust wrote: post #19

With little kids I am increasingly conscious about how to best equip them for the world when they are adults. I think previous playbook will need to be redrafted. 'Resilience' and 'Critical Thinking' are two things I am thinking are key any others?

The key is being rich before AGI hits. I cannot imagine any social mobility after that. And philosophy maybe to find a meaning for their lives in the world where achievements don't exist any more. And don't push them too hard to learn skills that will become obsolete anyway - having a relaxed mind is more important
Post reply on HN