61–70 of 182 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
.
A former attorney general is taking it for a spin, and has said great things about it so far. One of the top 100 lawyers in the US. HN has turned into a pit of hate. WTF all this hate for? People just really angry at AI, it seems. JFC, Grow up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
LLMs don't reason the way we do, but there are similarities at the cognitive pre-conscious level. I made a challenge to various lawyers and the Stanford Codex (no one took the bait yet) to find critical mistakes in the "reasoning" of our Legal AI. One former attorney general told us that he likes how it balances the intent of the law. Sample output (scroll and click on stats and the donuts on the second slide): Sampl…
.
This is much like other advances in computing. Being able to write code that compiled into assembly, instead of directly writing assembly, meant you could do more. Which soon meant you had to do more, because now everyone was expecting it. The internet meant you could take advantage of open source to build more complex software. Now, you have to. Cloud meant you could orchestrate complicated apps. Now you can't not k…
> LLMs will be the same. At the moment people are still mostly playing with it, but pretty soon it will be "hey why are you writing our REST API consumer by hand? LLM can do that for you!" Not everyone wants to be a "prompt engineer", or let their skills rust and be replaced with a dependency on a proprietary service. Not to mention the potentially detrimental cognitive effects of relegating all your thinking to LLMs…
I’m not sure I entirely agree but I do think the paradigm is shifting enough that I feel bad for my coworkers who intentionally don’t use AI. I can see a new skill developing in myself that augments my ability to perform and they are still taking ages doing the same old thing. Frankly, now is the sweet spot because the expectation hasn’t raised enough to meet the output so you can either squeeze time to tackle that tech debt or find time to kick up your feet until the industry catches up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
LLMs don't reason the way we do, but there are similarities at the cognitive pre-conscious level. I made a challenge to various lawyers and the Stanford Codex (no one took the bait yet) to find critical mistakes in the "reasoning" of our Legal AI. One former attorney general told us that he likes how it balances the intent of the law. Sample output (scroll and click on stats and the donuts on the second slide): Sampl…
.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You can now do literally anything. Literally. In theory. In practice, not so much. Not in my experience. I have a drive littered with failed AI projects. And by that I mean projects I have diligently tried to work with the AI (ChatGP, mostly in my case) to get something accomplished, and after hours over days of work, the projects don’t work. I shelve them and treat them like cryogenic heads. “Sometime in the futur…
You just aren’t delving deep enough. For every problem that stops you, ask the LLM. With enough context it’ll give you at least a mediocre way to get around your problem. It’s still a lot of hard work. But the only person that can stop yourself is you. (Which it looks like you’ve done.) List the reasons you’ve stopped below and I’ll give you prompts to get around them.
As a mostly LLM-skeptic I reluctantly agree this is something AI actually does well. When approaching unfamiliar territory, LLMs (1) use simple language (improvement over academia but also much professional intentionally obfuscated literature), (2) use the right abstraction (they seem good at ”zooming out” to big picture of things, and (3) you can move both laterally between topics and ”zoom in” quickly. Another way…
My experience is instead that LLMs (those I used) can be helpful there where solutions are quite well known (e.g. a standard task in some technology used by many), and terrible where the problem has not been tackled much by the public. About language (point (1)), I get a lot of "hypnotism for salesmen to non technical managers and roundabout comments" (e.g. "which wire should I cut, I have a red one and a blue one" /…
Yes, that's a necessary condition. If there isn't some well known solution, LLMs won't give you anything useful.
The point though, is that the solution was not well known to the GP. That's where LLMs shine, they "understand" what you are trying to say, and give you the answer you need, even when you don't know the applicable jargon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IT is never static. I have had to take several forks in my career with languages and technologies often leading to dead-ends and re-training. It is amazing how much you learn doing one thing directly translates to another, it can often lead to you not having a specific/narrow mindset too. Having an LLM next to you means there is never a stupid question, I ask the AI the same stupid questions repeatedly until I get it…
I'm worried about being replaced by LLM. If it keeps evolving to the point where a CTO can ask LLM to do something and deploy it, why he would pay for a team of engineers? Forking to different technologies and languages is one thing (I've been there, I started with PHP and I haven't touch it for almost a decade now), but being replaced by a new tech is something different. I don't see how I could pivot to still be us…
I definitely felt this. I thought "If I have to redo this in Flutter or in Swift, I can". I don't know either, so have to move with some caution (but it's all very exciting).
.. and even automating the testing to check results match, coming up with edge cases etc.
... and if thats true, then they could be useful for _optimizing_ by porting to other apis / algos, checking same-ness of behavior, then comparing performance.
The whole "vibe coding" doesn't grab me - as I feel the bottleneck is with my creativity and understanding rather than generating viable code - using a productive expressive language like javascript or lisp and working on a small code base helps that.
eg. I would like to be able to take an algo and port it to run on GPU for example... without having to ingest much arcane api quirks. JAX looks like a nice target, but Ive held off for now.
Probably right at the end of your career is where this tool would be the most useful An undergrad using the hottest tech right of the bat? Cooked. It's like giving the world 128gb of ram and 64bits in 1970, we would have just maxed it out by 1972.
> Cooked People using this phrase should probably stop, it's become extremely tiresome as a cliche
but I could be a Feynman radian out on those vectors in leet space.