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

The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 402 posts

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#301

Post by xanderlewis »

bdndndndbve wrote: post #88
datahack wrote: post #82

While I enjoyed the article, it’s just another in a line of the same article with different flavors and authors that all have the same fundamental error. The prevailing counterargument against AI consistently hinges on the present state of AI rather than the trajectory of its development: but what matters is not the capabilities of AI as they exist today, but the astonishing velocity at which those capabilities are e…

We've been through this song and dance before. AI researchers make legitimately impressive breakthroughs in specific tasks, people extrapolate linear growth, the air comes out of the balloon after a couple years when it turns out we couldn't just throw progressively larger models at the problem to emulate human cognition. I'm surprised that tech workers who should be the most skeptical about this kind of stuff end up…

> people extrapolate linear growth

You mean exponential! No one gets out of bed for linear these days.

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#302

Post by lolinder »

NemoNobody wrote: post #275
lolinder wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The prevailing counterargument against AI consistently hinges on the present state of AI rather than the trajectory of its development: but what matters is not the capabilities of AI as they exist today, but the astonishing velocity at which those capabilities are evolving. No, the prevailing counter argument is that the prevailing argument in favor of AI taking over everything assumes that the acceleration will re…

Moore's law is still going as far I'm aware - there may have been clarification of sorts recently but that's kept up exponentially rather well despite everyone knowing that it can't do that.

Moore's law would improve the speed of LLMs and improve their size, but in recent weeks [0] it's become apparent that we're hitting the limit of "just make them even bigger" being a viable strategy for improving the intelligence of LLMs.

I'm excited for these things to get even cheaper, and that will enable more use cases, but we're not going to see the world-changing prophesies of some of AI's evangelists in this thread come true by dint of cheaper current-gen models.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42125888

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#303

Post by lolinder »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #276
lolinder wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The prevailing counterargument against AI consistently hinges on the present state of AI rather than the trajectory of its development: but what matters is not the capabilities of AI as they exist today, but the astonishing velocity at which those capabilities are evolving. No, the prevailing counter argument is that the prevailing argument in favor of AI taking over everything assumes that the acceleration will re…

AI hypists come to the conclusion that general intelligence is inevitable because they know the brain exists and are materialists. Anyone who checks those two boxes will come to the conclusion that an artificial brain is possible and therefore AGI is as well. With the amount of money being spent then its only a matter of when

> With the amount of money being spent then its only a matter of when

Yes, but there's no strong reason to believe that "when" is "within fewer than 1000 years". What's frustrating about the hype is not that people think the brain is replicable, it's that they think that this single breakthrough will be the thing that replicates it.

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#304

Post by NemoNobody »

Nevermark wrote: post #178
nyokodo wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AI's are going to understand people better than people understand people. Maybe, but very little of the “data” that humans use to build their understanding of humans is recorded and available. If it were it’s not obvious it would be economical to train on. If it were economical it’s not obvious that current techniques would actually work that well and by definition no future techniques are known to work yet. I’m no…

You are describing the current state of AI as if it were a stable point. AI today is far ahead of two years ago. Every year for many years before that, deep learning models broke benchmark after benchmark before that breakout. There is no indication of any slow down. The complete reverse - we are seeing dramatic acceleration of an already fast moving field. Both research and resources are pouring into major improveme…

They are not using AI correctly to create such models. I'm not sure I want AGI right away or even at all, so I'm keeping my epiphany close for now but in the current field of AI nothing er wany will come of this bc it's not the right way.

As soon as the incredibly obvious, far too obvious realization is had, AI will make huge, tremendous leaps overnight essentially. Til then, these are just machine like software, the best we've ever made but nothing more than that.

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#305

Post by [deleted] »

NemoNobody wrote: post #297
greenthrow wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having this strong of an opinion on something you admittedly don't understand (the appeal of podcasts) is not a great choice. Maybe ask people instead of making up stuff.

I have very strong opinions on lots of things I can't understand why people like doing, I don't need to understand someone's satisfaction before I determine how I feel about what they are driving satisfaction from. That's ridiculous. I think people can't be alone with their own minds so they fill every second of there quiet time with someone else's thoughts rather than their own.

[deleted]

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#306

Post by floydnoel »

NemoNobody wrote: post #288
lupusreal wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Write a comment explaining that the ostensibly simple task of writing a dozen or so thank you letters for those socks/etc you received for Christmas can, for some people, be an excruciating task that takes weeks to complete, but with the aid of LLMs can easily be done in an hour. On second thought, you're right. That was easy.

That's old world stuff - I've never sent a thank you card and have lost no sleep bc of it.

you’re so cool!

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#307

Post by throwaway2037 »

FireBeyond wrote: post #214
tokioyoyo wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it just a matter of time until AI gets trained to generate attention-grabbing videos? Also, "the first three seconds" isn't exactly the case anymore. There's a push for algorithm to favour videos that are longer than 1+ minutes. Which, to my understanding, is TikTok's way of fighting for YouTube's userbase.

Similar on IG, which is why a lot of the photographers on my feed will post five or six images, "Which is your favorite, 1-6? Comment below!" because they get the engagement, synthetic or otherwise, of you clicking through each image, and then commenting.

I am curious to see this pattern in action. Can you share some @-usernames for these photographers?

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#308

Post by nitwit005 »

NemoNobody wrote: post #278
nitwit005 wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your time horizon? We're already at a date where people were saying these jobs would be gone. The people most optimistic about the trajectory of this technology were clearly wrong. If you tell me AI newscasters will be fully functional in 10 or 15 years, I'll believe it. But that far in the future, I'd also believe news will be totally transformed due to some other technology we aren't thinking about yet.

Who gives a shit about AI newscasters? AI allows us to see everything we track the data of rn - and see in a useful way and in real time. It also allows all the tedious and repetitive tasks done by everyone, no longer needs to be done by anyone - creating a static webpage or graphics for a mobile app, a mobile app, or game development - a of those are the easiest to do they ever have been. AI isn't for millennials or…

You're declaring you don't give a shit about the current topic. Why are you here?

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#309

Post by floydnoel »

NemoNobody wrote: post #273
vunderba wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree with this. There's a big difference between something that benefits productivity versus something that benefits humanity. I think a good test for if it genuinely has changed society is if all gen AI were to disappear overnight. I would argue that nothing would really fundamentally change. Contrast that with the sudden disappearance of the internet, or the combustion engine.

Work doesn't benefit humanity, work is the chains that keep us living the same day over and over til we die. Your idea of benefit to humanity clearly doesn't involve the end of work, mine does. AI can end work for most of us but that has to be what we want, can't be limiting it all the time bc of stupid reasons and expect it to have all the answers as if it weren't limited, that's silly. If AI disappeared tonight so…

work is what gives us purpose and meaning. or do you want to live in wall-e world?

there is no long-term happiness without struggle and mastery.

it sounds like what you want is an end of menial labor that is treated poorly. why confuse that with work?

Post reply on HN