[dupe]
Avoid 5 day old syndicated content.
Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/28/technology/ai-chief-execu...
If A.I. Can Do Your Job, Maybe It Can Also Replace Your CEO
161–170 of 199 posts
Re: If A.I. Can Do Your Job, Maybe It Can Also Replace Your CEO
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This reads like a comment from a person who has not tried to integrate LLMs into various workflows This reads like a comment from a person who makes the discussion about the other person. > Curiosity is about not being categorical - "It's Stack Overflow copy-pasting MkII." is extremely categorical and thus, anti-curiosity. You could say the exact same thing about someone criticizing regular Stack Overflow copy-past…
The root for this is a comment that urges to boycott some persons startup because they express that they were thankful for the advice they get from LLMs (a PhD in physics, that is). Yes, I find that commentary extremely inappropriate. And yes, I am defending my stance in the sub-threads. But tell me: you say that my critique of a reductionist categorical view on the use of LLMs (it is merely stack overflow...) is cat…
>The root for this is a comment that urges to boycott some persons startup because
I didn't write it so don't care about the "root for this".
I quoted what I was commenting upon: "Why do you think it is anti-curiosity to use LLMs?".
>Yes, I find that commentary extremely inappropriate.
Feel free to do so. Has nothing to do with my comments and it's not a responce to my arguments. It's sidelining them and trying to appeal to outrage and emotion by getting back to what a different person said.
Re: If A.I. Can Do Your Job, Maybe It Can Also Replace Your CEO
#163I don't really buy it. CEO is all about softskills, uncertainty, weighing risks, intuition, vision etc. All the things LLMs are terrible at. If you just want some generic MBA like wall of text spouting robot that you can call "CEO" for 15 mins of limelight then yeah got for it, but that's not really what makes a really great CEO, is it?
> If you just want some generic MBA like wall of text spouting robot that you can call "CEO" for 15 mins of limelight then yeah got for it, but that's not really what makes a really great CEO, is it?
I don't think the idea is that you're eliminating the mythical great CEO in the 99th percentile. You're eliminating the bottom 80% of MBA-like wall of text CEOs who provide minimal value while siphoning millions in capital that could instead be invested back into the business.
Re: If A.I. Can Do Your Job, Maybe It Can Also Replace Your CEO
#164I keep thinking of that Warren Bennis's quote: "The factory of the future will have only two employees, a man and a dog. The man will be there to feed the dog. The dog will be there to keep the man from touching the equipment." Only now I think the dog will be robotic too.
What a beautiful thought.
Reminds me of the scene at the end of Vonnegut's Player Piano (an allegory of his time working @GE, post-WWII), where the main character meets the blue-collar craftsmen whose movements trained the present-day automatons drunk in a bar... sedated/distracted, in drink, to prevent interference with the machines.
--
Both dog and man will bot, no?
Re: If A.I. Can Do Your Job, Maybe It Can Also Replace Your CEO
#165Software engineer here trying to start a startup. The amount of business advice GPT-4 has given me is immeasurable. I'd say I'm getting 10x more non technical business advice in multiple areas than I'm getting with the technical stuff. Kind of like an AI CEO advising me on what to do next.
What sort of questions do you ask it?
Re: If A.I. Can Do Your Job, Maybe It Can Also Replace Your CEO
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
The root for this is a comment that urges to boycott some persons startup because they express that they were thankful for the advice they get from LLMs (a PhD in physics, that is). Yes, I find that commentary extremely inappropriate. And yes, I am defending my stance in the sub-threads. But tell me: you say that my critique of a reductionist categorical view on the use of LLMs (it is merely stack overflow...) is cat…
> The root for this is a comment that urges to boycott some persons startup because I didn't write it so don't care about the "root for this". I quoted what I was commenting upon: "Why do you think it is anti-curiosity to use LLMs?". > Yes, I find that commentary extremely inappropriate. Feel free to do so. Has nothing to do with my comments and it's not a responce to my arguments. It's sidelining them and trying to…
You do enter into a context when you decide responding within a thread - let's see if we can forget this.
Your sentiment is that this is stack overflow c/p style business development. I understand this as: You receive instructions from a third party entity and carry them out verbatim. An because that to use a LLM that is anti-curiosity.
Let's delve into that, shall we?
1. Following instructions verbatim is as old as instructions. You could apply the same sentiment to mentorship, books, and well, Q/A systems. Just to inspire some reflection: Do you think good chefs ever use recipes or is that only bad chefs? It is quite well established that following instructions is key to learning.
2. You say that it is equivalent to follow instructions from an LLM to following instructions from SO - I think this misses a key feature of LLMs: The ability to index them. You can tell them they are care about business development in a narrow sense, to what it is index all future responses. This is realtime interactive and does probe behavior like changing what you index your instructions for, which indeed is the core of curiosity.
Based on this I hold on to my previous statement as a response yo your comment:
> Curiosity is about not being categorical - "It's Stack Overflow copy-pasting MkII." is extremely categorical and thus, anti-curiosity.
I do find that your line of thought is narrow and dismissed the elements to be curious about regarding LLMs.
Re: If A.I. Can Do Your Job, Maybe It Can Also Replace Your CEO
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
Journalism is an interesting one as, in a way, the most important thing isn’t being correct/accurate/imformative etc, it’s getting clicks AI is already very good at writing clickbait nonsense, and if an AI can pump that out faster than a real person can, it’s game over
Actual journalists, like the people that go out and follow leads, interview people… ya know, investigate—they’ll be a little harder to replace with AI since their job happens in the meat-space. Hot-take writers and other people whose job is opinion having might have more trouble.
My experience of journalists has been that they often just email you to ask questions. LLMs can do that.
Re: If A.I. Can Do Your Job, Maybe It Can Also Replace Your CEO
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The root for this is a comment that urges to boycott some persons startup because I didn't write it so don't care about the "root for this". I quoted what I was commenting upon: "Why do you think it is anti-curiosity to use LLMs?". > Yes, I find that commentary extremely inappropriate. Feel free to do so. Has nothing to do with my comments and it's not a responce to my arguments. It's sidelining them and trying to…
You do enter into a context when you decide responding within a thread - let's see if we can forget this. Your sentiment is that this is stack overflow c/p style business development. I understand this as: You receive instructions from a third party entity and carry them out verbatim. An because that to use a LLM that is anti-curiosity. Let's delve into that, shall we? 1. Following instructions verbatim is as old as…
>You do enter into a context when you decide responding within a thread - let's see if we can forget this.
Oh, please
Re: If A.I. Can Do Your Job, Maybe It Can Also Replace Your CEO
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actual journalists, like the people that go out and follow leads, interview people… ya know, investigate—they’ll be a little harder to replace with AI since their job happens in the meat-space. Hot-take writers and other people whose job is opinion having might have more trouble.
My experience of journalists has been that they often just email you to ask questions. LLMs can do that.
I can imagine there are lots of cases where that might work. But for example, if you are covering a small town police scandal or something, you might end up wanting to talk to people who’d rather not comment online or might not even have a super strong online presence/identity.
I don’t know you, but lots of people on this site do internet stuff, if you are for example an open source contributor worth reporting on, academic, or somebody like that, you probably are exactly the sort of person that an LLM would be best at contacting, right?
Re: If A.I. Can Do Your Job, Maybe It Can Also Replace Your CEO
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
I love the HN mindset. See, most people here have some aspiration towards being the next great CEO so of course AI can’t possibly do that job. But, sure, it can do everyone else’s job and even drive cars and fly planes. Please.
It's pretty comical to read - "no no no, it can't predict THOSE tokens!!!" XD
Making intelligent decisions != predicting tokens. Current AI only resembles intelligence to those that don't understand it. It's a tool that should operate with the guidance of a human.