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

Nvidia CEO criticizes Anthropic boss over his statements on AI

tomshardware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 195 posts

Re: Nvidia CEO criticizes Anthropic boss over his statements on AI

#101

Post by bluefirebrand »

MostlyStable wrote: post #89
bluefirebrand wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like wages are about 20 years removed where they should be then, since cost of living didn't exactly stagnate for 20 years

"Real" as opposed to "nominal" in this context means inflation adjusted, which means that wages have been increasing faster than inflation for 30 years. Now, it is true that some components of cost of living, most notably housing, have (especially in particular regions) also increased in cost faster than the general inflation level. But that's not due to some inherent breakdown between productivity and wages. It's du…

> which means that wages have been increasing faster than inflation for 30 years

If you look at the graph you posted and carried the slope of the pre-70s trajectory forward, assuming that the 70s-90s slump had not happened, would the graph end in the same place it is currently?

No. Not even close

> So if you want to have that discussion, that's fine, but it's totally separate from the original discussion about productivity and wages.

It's absolutely not a separate discussion, the end result is that the same "real wage" that used to provide a comfortable life is now poverty

You cannot just shrug your shoulders and say "well incomes are matching productivity so this is fine actually"

Re: Nvidia CEO criticizes Anthropic boss over his statements on AI

#103

Post by thayne »

MostlyStable wrote: post #71
Arainach wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Productivity per capita is dramatically up since the 1970s. Wages are flat. Employers are greedy and short sighted. Employers would rather pay more to hire someone new who doesn't know their business than give a raise to an existing employee who's doing well. They're not going to pay someone more because they're more productive, they'll pay them the same and punish anyone who can't meet the new quota.

This is not true. Wages did stagnate from about the mid 70s until about the mid 90s, but median, real wages have been increasing steadily since then [0] [0] https://x.com/LettieriDC/status/1922704140834099370

Increasing and stagnating are not mutually exclusive. Wages may be increasing, but the benefits of productivity gains have not been evenly distributed. Productivity has increased faster than wages have, and difference has gone to the already wealthy.

Re: Nvidia CEO criticizes Anthropic boss over his statements on AI

#104

Post by willis936 »

hnlmorg wrote: post #54
kbos87 wrote: post #19

Companies like Nvidia and OpenAI base their answers to any questions on economic risk on their own best interests and a pretty short view of history. They are fighting like hell to make sure they are among a small set of winners while waving away the risk or claiming that there's some better future for the majority of people on the other side of all this. To claim that all of the benefit isn't going to naturally accr…

That backlash is already happening. Which is why we are seeing the rise in right wing extremism. People are voting for change. The problem is they’re also voting for the very establishment they’re protesting against.

Surveys aren't revealing that AI legislation is a top 3 issue for constituents on either side. It might as well be under the noise floor politically.

Re: Nvidia CEO criticizes Anthropic boss over his statements on AI

#105

Post by seadan83 »

falcor84 wrote: post #55
quonn wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's early days and nobody knows how things will go, but to me it looks that in the next century or so How is it early days? AI has been talked about since at least the 50s, neural networks have been a thing since the 80s. If you are worried about how technology will be in a century, why stop right here? Why not take the state of computers in the 60s and stop there? Chances are, if the current wave does not achieve…

> How is it early days? When you have exponential growth, it's always early days. Other than that I'm not clear on what you're saying. What is in your mind the difference between how we should plan for the societal impact of AI in the short vs the long term?

Is it early days of exponential growth? The growth of AI to beat humans in chess and then Go took a long time. Appears to be step function growth. LLMs have limitations and can't double their growth for much longer. I'd argue they never did double, just a step function with a slow linear growth since.

The crowd claiming exponential growth have been at it for not quite a decade now. I have trouble separating fact from CEOs of AI companies shilling to attract that VC money. VCs desperately want to solve the expensive software engineer problem, you don't get that cash by claiming AI will be 3% better YoY

Re: Nvidia CEO criticizes Anthropic boss over his statements on AI

#106

Post by zozbot234 »

candiddevmike wrote: post #92
uhhhhhhh wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies are actively not hiring expecting AI to compensate and still have growth. I have seen these same companies giving smaller raises and less promotions, and eliminate junior positions. The endgame isn't more employees or paying them more. It's paying less people or no skilled people when possible. That's a fairly massive disruption.

All that I've seen with AI in the workplace is my coworkers becoming dumber. Asking them technical questions they should know the answer to has turned into "let me LLM that for you" and giving me an overly broad response. It's infuriating. I've also hilariously seen this in meetings, where folks are being asked something and awkwardly fill time while they wait for a response which they try and not read word for word.

That's totally normal actually. When you ask, you have to tell them "Think through this step by step."

Re: Nvidia CEO criticizes Anthropic boss over his statements on AI

#107

Post by hollowturtle »

Am I a skeptic/fool if I think every claim made these CEOs is just bs and they're just over exaggerating to let their product/self image look like real game changer? Like I still don't see any white collar job lost except for companies pretending AI will do the work as an execuse to do massive lay offs. Plus over the history every game changer technology enabled more jobs than before, I don't get the fomo they're injecting into society causing all this anciety just for selfish returns. IMO We should keep Amodei accountable in five years if no jobs are lost but more are created

Re: Nvidia CEO criticizes Anthropic boss over his statements on AI

#108

Post by lazystar »

bluefirebrand wrote: post #93
lazystar wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it’s going to eliminate jobs. that's the part i'm not sold on yet. it's a tool that allows you to do a year's work in a week - but every dev in every company will be able to use that tool, thus it will increase the productivity of each engineer by an equal amount. that means each company's products will get much better much faster - and it means that any company that cuts head count will be at risk of falling behin…

> it's a tool that allows you to do a year's work in a week Exaggerations like this really don't help your credibility

the amount isn't relevant to the argument; the point is that the amount - whatever that may be - is applied equally to all companies, which means the competitive balance will stay the same. its a great build tool, but you still need builders to use the tool.

Re: Nvidia CEO criticizes Anthropic boss over his statements on AI

#109

Post by shanemhansen »

uhhhhhhh wrote: post #52
zozbot234 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Massive disruption" of what kind? Current AI abilities make white-collar work more productive and potentially higher-paid, not less.

Companies are actively not hiring expecting AI to compensate and still have growth. I have seen these same companies giving smaller raises and less promotions, and eliminate junior positions. The endgame isn't more employees or paying them more. It's paying less people or no skilled people when possible. That's a fairly massive disruption.

I don't believe them. I believe that as we exit zero interest rates, companies have to cut back and "we are doing AI" is easier to sell the investors and even their own employees than "yeah we want to spend less on people".

Re: Nvidia CEO criticizes Anthropic boss over his statements on AI

#110

Post by quonn »

dsign wrote: post #36
quonn wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's early days and nobody knows how things will go, but to me it looks that in the next century or so How is it early days? AI has been talked about since at least the 50s, neural networks have been a thing since the 80s. If you are worried about how technology will be in a century, why stop right here? Why not take the state of computers in the 60s and stop there? Chances are, if the current wave does not achieve…

I said that one hundred years from now humans would have likely gone the way of the horse. It will be a finished business, not a thing starting. We may take it with some chill, depending on how we value our species and our descendants and the long human history and our legacy. It's a very individual thing. I'm not chill. There's no comparing the AI we have today with what we had 5 years ago. There's a huge qualitativ…

I think you severely underestimate what the 8 billion human beings on this planet can and will do. They are not like horses at all. They will not allow themselves to be ruled by, like, 10 billionaires operating an AI and furthermore if all work vanishes then we will find other things to do. Just ask a beach bum or a monk or children in school or athletes or students or an artist or the filthy rich. There _are_ ways to spend your time.

You can‘t just judge humans in terms of economic value given the fact that the economy is something that those humans made for themselves. It‘s not like there can be an „economy“ without humankind.

The only problem is the current state where perhaps _some_ work disappears, creating serious problems for those holding those jobs.

As for being creative, we had GPT2 more than 5 years ago and it did produce stories.

And the current AI is nothing like a human being in terms of the quality of the output. Not even close. It‘s laughable and to me it seems like ChatGPT specifically is getting worse and worse and they put more and more lipstick on the pig by making it appear more submissive and producing more emojis.

Post reply on HN