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

ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

d3.harvard.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 282 posts

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#261

Post by WalterBright »

Nition wrote: post #244
telotortium wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In practice you need both. Max Martin himself has produced and songwritten for plenty of no-names, but for an artist that has the requisite marketing support, bad or uncatchy pop songs can absolutely ruin an artist who would otherwise make it big.

There is a third factor; the quality of the mix. People like Serban Ghenea[0] get hired to make the sound world class. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serban_Ghenea

Which is why Michael Jackson hired Quincy Jones to fix his music.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#263

Post by emidln »

johndhi wrote: post #227
highwaylights wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Your ideas are bad. 2) Spreadsheets exist. 3) No-one cares about your marketing copy. 4) No-one finds your c-suite babble inspirational. This is almost perfect input to an LLM exactly because of how low value it is in the first place.

Often the benefit of management consultants is they help the company feel better about firing or laying off people. Actually a robot would be perfect at that. No one likes doing layoffs but chat gpt won't mind

> Actually a robot would be perfect at that. No one likes doing layoffs but chat gpt won't mind

Maybe chatgpt should be trained to care.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#264

Post by jonbell »

l33t7332273 wrote: post #182
t8sr wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Man, write drunk, but edit sober.

Is the post that bad? What does it say about me if I didn’t think that it was that bad?

It’s a bit long for the TLDR crowd, and it was passionate.

But no, it was a good post and the cultural expectation to keep things shorter and more buttoned up has some real downsides.

I would have written this with more punch, but, well, see above.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#265

Post by amccloud »

p1esk wrote: post #241
lambdaba wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me it looks very analogous to AI-generated "art", it's very easy to generate some generally esthetically pleasing visuals, but the depth of the art stays in proportion with the input effort... Which is often not much. All of this shouldn't be very surprising really, and there's still a lot of usefulness to it, if only for depreciating the low-quality copy-paste productions and making the really unique and novel on…

What is “depth of the art”?

storytelling and perceived value

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#266

Post by footy »

simonw wrote: post #159
footy wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have free access to copilot because I do some open source work. I haven't been impressed by what it can do and I wouldn't pay even $3/month to use it. The second question doesn't make sense to me. There are tons of things I think are useless (or worse) that people pay for anyway. Meal kit boxes come to mind, and at least you can eat those at the end of the day.

Have you spent any time learning how to use Copilot? Getting great results out of it takes a lot of experimentation and practice. I wouldn't want to give it up now I've learned how to use it.

I've spent some time using it and experimenting with different prompts, but to be honest it's hard to be motivated to spend more time on it given the disappointing results so far.

I need to see a glimmer of it being useful before I decide the investment is worth it, I guess.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#267

Post by gumballindie »

simonw wrote: post #149
gumballindie wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They can be worse than worthless. They can sabotage your work if you let them making you spend even more time fixing it afterwards. I basically gave up on llms because i was spending more time figuring out what it did wrong than actually getting value. People without programming skill are still impressed by them. But they yet have to learn or deliver anything of value even with the help of chat bots.

I have twenty years of programming experience and LLMs give me a significant productivity boost for programming on a daily basis: https://simonwillison.net/2023/Sep/29/llms-podcast/#code-int...

I have met my share of folks with decades of experience that was not of quality. The most hilarious are those that open tar gz files using notepad wondering where the code is to those that work on the web but dont know what xsrf is. Experience while long if it’s of the not so great type doesnt count. Not saying this is the case.

LLMs do produce impressive code. Even if they were indeed just procedural generators it would still be impressive. The code has structure and appears useful.

But the issue is that you can tell it makes no sense, there is no thought process behind it. It fits in no greater picture.

Even if you add more context it still has no purpose.

People that find this useful are the same type that copy stackoverflow code that they dont understand. It kinda works when it does but again it doesnt fit in the bigger picture.

Code isnt about spelling instructions - an…ai can do that - code is about what goes where in a way that the what changes as often as the where. It’s the bigger picture. So yes it can help and replace those that spell instructions but it will be hard to replace those that are required to deliver more.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#268

Post by gumballindie »

simonw wrote: post #163
zare_st wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I may have gotten something wrong by skimming over your link. Is this the "significant project" you have been assisted by LLMs? https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-history

That's one of about a dozen at this point - but yeah, that's the one that I used LLMs to research the initial triggers and schema design for. Here's the transcript (it pre-dates the ChatGPT share feature): https://gist.github.com/simonw/1aa4050f3f7d92b048ae414a40cdd... I wrote more about it here: https://simonwillison.net/2023/Apr/15/sqlite-history/ Here's another one I built using AppleScript: https://github.com/dog…

While it is impressive that an ai can generate all this, the code is anything but significant. Using triggers for history is one sure way to bring a scalable system down fast and one of the first lessons a junior will learn.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#269

Post by hfjjbf »

johndhi wrote: post #227
highwaylights wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Your ideas are bad. 2) Spreadsheets exist. 3) No-one cares about your marketing copy. 4) No-one finds your c-suite babble inspirational. This is almost perfect input to an LLM exactly because of how low value it is in the first place.

Often the benefit of management consultants is they help the company feel better about firing or laying off people. Actually a robot would be perfect at that. No one likes doing layoffs but chat gpt won't mind

[dead]

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#270

Post by ShamelessC »

iudqnolq wrote: post #63
segfaltnh wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly if you don't care about precision, /dev/zero is going to give you more throughput. Plus, I personally guarantee it's correct to within an error margin of 4.0. You can't offer the same with /dev/random!

Reminds me of the study that found a massive change in GPT's proficiency at identifying primes. It switched from always guessing composite to always guessing prime. Much less accurate.

What do you mean?
Post reply on HN