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

A Research Preview of Codex

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 487 posts

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#451

Post by rowanG077 »

voidspark wrote: post #324
rowanG077 wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AI creates novel algorithms beating thousands of googlers. Random HNer on an AI post one day later > Its currently slightly more configurable clipart. It's so ridiculous at this point that I can just laugh about this.

Comparing music and algorithms is nonsense. AI music is disposable generic soulless trash, even if it is technically correct, in accordance with the rules and conventions of music theory. AI generates Muzak. Totally generic and derivative. There is no AI equivalent to Kurt Cobain, or James Brown, or Tori Amos.

There is no AI equivalent to Kurt Cobain or any other artists because 99% of what they are is not at all about their musical skill but all about marketing. There are thousands of musicians just as skilled if not more than Kurt Cobain or James Brown yet who don't have their fame. I also have no doubt an AI will outperform most musicians in short order in the foreseeable future. The step from making no music at all, to making acceptable music is gigantic compared to making acceptable music to making great music.

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#452

Post by rowanG077 »

roflyear wrote: post #420
rowanG077 wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't say AI is creating something new but that it isn't being creative with clearly explaining why you think that's the case. AI is creating novel solution to problems humans haven't cracked in centuries. I don't see anything more creative than this.

> AI is creating novel solution to problems humans haven't cracked in centuries Really?

Yes, really. Just yesterday google announced their AI was able to improve on human SotA algorithms in 25% of the cases fed into it. One of them was 4x4 complex matrix multiply. Which had pretty huge pressure to be improved.

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#453

Post by [deleted] »

rowanG077 wrote: post #451
voidspark wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comparing music and algorithms is nonsense. AI music is disposable generic soulless trash, even if it is technically correct, in accordance with the rules and conventions of music theory. AI generates Muzak. Totally generic and derivative. There is no AI equivalent to Kurt Cobain, or James Brown, or Tori Amos.

There is no AI equivalent to Kurt Cobain or any other artists because 99% of what they are is not at all about their musical skill but all about marketing. There are thousands of musicians just as skilled if not more than Kurt Cobain or James Brown yet who don't have their fame. I also have no doubt an AI will outperform most musicians in short order in the foreseeable future. The step from making no music at all, to…

[deleted]

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#454

Post by voidspark »

rowanG077 wrote: post #451
voidspark wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comparing music and algorithms is nonsense. AI music is disposable generic soulless trash, even if it is technically correct, in accordance with the rules and conventions of music theory. AI generates Muzak. Totally generic and derivative. There is no AI equivalent to Kurt Cobain, or James Brown, or Tori Amos.

There is no AI equivalent to Kurt Cobain or any other artists because 99% of what they are is not at all about their musical skill but all about marketing. There are thousands of musicians just as skilled if not more than Kurt Cobain or James Brown yet who don't have their fame. I also have no doubt an AI will outperform most musicians in short order in the foreseeable future. The step from making no music at all, to…

[dead]

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#455

Post by eru »

ajkjk wrote: post #443
eru wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what you are on about? You can make arbitrary teams, like legal, make PRs. You would still have the proper owners of the project agree whether they take the PRs. Either by human review and/or by any other review process they set up.

I am on about the fact that you are imagining something working in a way that it does not work in practice. You have two choices: 1. A developer makes a PR. They build the app and run it themselves to make sure it works, does what they intended, and nothing unexpected happens, and report on their testing in the PR. There's also a suite of automated tests. Between these you are confident that you can rubber-stamp it w…

The non-developer can also kick off a build and test the app.

So they can at least check whether the change does what they wanted it to do.

For this to be useful, the code doesn't even have to be good: think of it as a more accurate way to gather requirements and make a prototype. That's useful, even if you throw away the code.

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#456

Post by whimsicalism »

Zacharias030 wrote: post #421
whimsicalism wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

do most people know country codes to the degree that they know CH is Switzerland? as feedback, i found this added an unnecessary extra layer of opacity to this comment

I like how the smallest Eurocentrism is greeted with the wagging finger to be inclusive on hackernews, while the expectation is that 50 state acronyms are well understood by any reader from Lazio, Lorraine, or Thuringia ;)

This is an english language forum, so I think quite naturally an acronym in a different language is less interpretable to english speakers globally.

GER isn’t even a valid country code so it compounds the confusion, if we are going to make a fake three-letter country code for Germany derived from English, why not do the same for significantly more obscure Switzerland?

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#457

Post by zo1 »

eru wrote: post #384
zo1 wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The place where I work at hires an ungodly amount of juniors and fresh-grads (because a lot of them drop out and quit before they do any meaningful work). We're talking people that are completely unproductive and unusable for any sort of commercial project. We then spend at-least a year or two giving them a salary whilst they do toy projects and get trained. Literally doing what I remember doing in 1st/2nd year colle…

Why does your company even hire those people? They seem like a net negative as far as your profit-and-loss is concerned? I mean even compared to just not hiring any juniors.

Probably to have a chance at finding a small handful of smart and productive juniors. That, or they need bodies to make up the racial quotas imposed by government regulation, otherwise the company can't get any government contracts.

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#458

Post by brookst »

krapp wrote: post #427
brookst wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serious deja vu to the late 70’s and early 80’s when “real musicians” said exactly the same thing about synthesizers and drum machines.

The difference, of course, being that synthesizers and drum machines are instruments that require actual skill and talent and can be used to express the unique musical style of an artist, whereas AI requires neither skill nor talent, and it cannot generate anything with actual artistic direction, intent or innovation, much less a unique creative style. AI is never going to give the world a modern Kraftwerk or Silver…

Still the same thing. The argument then was that synths weren’t “real instruments” and that sequencers meant people weren’t “real musicians”.

AI relies on prompting. In the hands of a skilled artist it is just another tool. In the hands of an amateur hack, it is no different than giving a drum kit to a 4 year old.

The tool is not the art. It never was.

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#459

Post by brookst »

surgical_fire wrote: post #446
brookst wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Protect you from what? What harm is there to you if someone uses some of your code to build a business, as compared to not doing so? How are you worse off? I’ve never understood this mentality. It seems very zero sum and kind of anti social. I’ve built a couple of businesses, and there’s always economic or technical precedent. I honestly don’t mind paying it forward if someone can benefit from side projects I enjoyed…

> What harm is there to you if someone uses some of your code to build a business, as compared to not doing so? How are you worse off? This someone might be someone I dislike. It would cause me some mild annoyance that they benefited from my effort.

It’s not healthy to let hypothetical spite guide your participation in civilization.

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#460

Post by surgical_fire »

brookst wrote: post #459
surgical_fire wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What harm is there to you if someone uses some of your code to build a business, as compared to not doing so? How are you worse off? This someone might be someone I dislike. It would cause me some mild annoyance that they benefited from my effort.

It’s not healthy to let hypothetical spite guide your participation in civilization.

It's also not healthy to sip on whiskey or smoke some tobacco, but I do both on occasion.

Spite is also pretty pleasurable.

Post reply on HN