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

AI Crap

drewdevault.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 260 posts

Re: AI Crap

#251

Post by Aerbil313 »

mort96 wrote: post #107
andai wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>bias towards speaking to a human on the phone Hatred of phone calls aside, I heard an interesting take from Alex Hormozi (paraphrased): "You're on the phone and you say, are you human? No? Oh thank God, because you know the AI has a thousand times more experience than all the humans combined."

Is that supposed to be a serious opinion about contemporary AI..? Because that's crazy to me. Humans can be reasoned with. AI can't. My experience with the likes of ChatGPT tells me that if the AI is wrong about something (which it very very often is), there's no point trying to explain to it that it's wrong or how it's wrong, it will say something like "You are right, sorry for the confusion." and follow up with the…

> an intelligent entity which can actually be reasoned with

We're just too impatient to wait for GPT-7 aren't we?

Re: AI Crap

#252

Post by RecycledEle »

JeremyNT wrote: post #197
RecycledEle wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The good AI can do for humanity is increasing our productivity. It should be the goal of every human to eliminate as many jobs as possible. Every job that is eliminated frees up that person and the people who would have done that job in the future to do other work. Humanity gain the productivity of that other work. If we had not forced painful job losses on people, we would still be 97% subsistence farmers, as we wer…

> It should be the goal of every human to eliminate as many jobs as possible. I mean this is exactly what Drew is disputing. The capital class will remove the jobs, capture the value of whatever labor is saved, and the workers who lose their jobs will be left with fewer resources and no realistic path to replace their lost income. They won't glide towards some utopian vision where everybody ends up working one day a…

If the corporations will not hire you, start your own business.

Re: AI Crap

#253

Post by RecycledEle »

HWR_14 wrote: post #144
RecycledEle wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The good AI can do for humanity is increasing our productivity. It should be the goal of every human to eliminate as many jobs as possible. Every job that is eliminated frees up that person and the people who would have done that job in the future to do other work. Humanity gain the productivity of that other work. If we had not forced painful job losses on people, we would still be 97% subsistence farmers, as we wer…

When was the widespread unemployment in the US due to technological innovations

Widespread unemployment occurred in the 19th and early 20th centuries as Americans left farms to move to cities.

They were desperate for work.

The unemployment in farms was caused by the Industrial Revolution.

Re: AI Crap

#254

Post by RecycledEle »

incrudible wrote: post #173
HWR_14 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When was the widespread unemployment in the US due to technological innovations

The problem is not unemployment, it is raising the bar for valuable labor. Arguably the standard of living has already declined for the average human individual. A factory job used to afford a single worker with modest education a house and a family. That said, generative AI will have far less impact here than, say, a robot arm.

The bar for viable labor is rising.

It is also easier that ever to educate yourself.

These two facts balance.

Re: AI Crap

#255

Post by [deleted] »

ChatGTP wrote: post #50
dandellion wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a native English speaker and ChatGPT is the best existing tool to spell check and fix gramatical errors in emails. Copilot is another very useful application, and I think your dismissal of it is invalid. Even if we accept that Copilot hurts new devs (which I don't know if you have any proof but I'll make the concession that it is a possibility). A double edged sword hurts and helps the same person. I and half…

As someone on the receiving end of these types of LLM enhanced emails, I'd say just make sure you actually can be confident it is indeed communicating your message properly. I work with a guy who has been covering up his poor use of the English language and it's been quite weird to be honest. Fluent soudning emails full of convincing sounding gibberish is what I've been receiving. Unfortunately the guy just isn't goo…

[deleted]

Re: AI Crap

#256

Post by dandellion »

ChatGTP wrote: post #50
dandellion wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a native English speaker and ChatGPT is the best existing tool to spell check and fix gramatical errors in emails. Copilot is another very useful application, and I think your dismissal of it is invalid. Even if we accept that Copilot hurts new devs (which I don't know if you have any proof but I'll make the concession that it is a possibility). A double edged sword hurts and helps the same person. I and half…

As someone on the receiving end of these types of LLM enhanced emails, I'd say just make sure you actually can be confident it is indeed communicating your message properly. I work with a guy who has been covering up his poor use of the English language and it's been quite weird to be honest. Fluent soudning emails full of convincing sounding gibberish is what I've been receiving. Unfortunately the guy just isn't goo…

When I put in the prompt to correct spelling and grammar it rarely changes anything else. Sometimes I'll use it to reword things but I'll make sure the meaning is clear. I read a lot more English than I write so usually telling if something "sounds natural" is very easy, even if writing doesn't come as easy.

Re: AI Crap

#257

Post by incrudible »

RecycledEle wrote: post #254
incrudible wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is not unemployment, it is raising the bar for valuable labor. Arguably the standard of living has already declined for the average human individual. A factory job used to afford a single worker with modest education a house and a family. That said, generative AI will have far less impact here than, say, a robot arm.

The bar for viable labor is rising. It is also easier that ever to educate yourself. These two facts balance.

If you believe that anyone can learn anything, that might sound plausible to you. The evidence does not point in this direction, however.

Re: AI Crap

#258

Post by jongjong »

self_awareness wrote: post #222
jongjong wrote: post #30

Maybe what we need is a hybrid communist/capitalist system. Governments should nationalize public stock markets and all large companies with a market cap above a certain amount.

This way the companies will be sure not to ever reach a certain market cap. If they will be close, the companies will split, so that they'll never be big enough.

Seems like a good thing.

Re: AI Crap

#259

Post by akaij »

bayindirh wrote: post #249
6ak74rfy wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who’s to say that the AI-generated content will be worse than human-generated? Just because that’s the case today doesn’t mean it’ll be so forever.

Because it's upper limit is the best human created content. It doesn't create anything out of thin air. Just "emitting" things mixed from its training set. Also, a machine cannot create equally complex or more complex than itself, so AI is always capped at human capacity, at most, asymptotically. It can be faster. It can batch process, but it can't process "like a human".

For now.

Re: AI Crap

#260

Post by bayindirh »

akaij wrote: post #259
bayindirh wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's upper limit is the best human created content. It doesn't create anything out of thin air. Just "emitting" things mixed from its training set. Also, a machine cannot create equally complex or more complex than itself, so AI is always capped at human capacity, at most, asymptotically. It can be faster. It can batch process, but it can't process "like a human".

For now.

Well, nature's laws are pretty resilient as far as I can see.

Laws about thermodynamics, and entropy still hold. Also, as far as I can see, no living creature, incl The Nature itself succeeded to create something more complex and sophisticated than itself.

So, I'll be sticking to my arguments, for now.

Post reply on HN