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

LLM Inevitabilism

tomrenner.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 1001 posts

Re: LLM Inevitabilism

#131

Post by mrtesthah »

Sabinus wrote: post #40
mrtesthah wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Things “happen” in human history only because humans make them happen. If enough humans do or don’t want something to happen, then they can muster the collective power to achieve it. The unstated corollary in this essay is that venture capital and oligarchs do not get to define our future simply because they have more money.

Would you say the industrial revolution would have been able to be stopped by enough humans not wanting to achieve it? >The unstated premise of this essay is that venture capital and oligarchs do not get to define our future simply because they have more money. AI would progress without them. Not as fast, but it would. In my mind the inevitability of technological progress comes from our competition with each other a…

Currently, AI is improved through concerted human effort and energy-intensive investments. Without that human interest and effort, progress in the field would slow.

But even if AI development continues unabated, nothing is forcing us to deploy AI in ways that reduce our quality of life. We have a choice over how it's used in our society because we are the ones who are building that society.

>Would you say the industrial revolution would have been able to be stopped by enough humans not wanting to achieve it?

Yes, let's start in early 1800s England: subsistence farmers were pushed off the land by the enclosure acts and, upon becoming landless, flocked to urban areas to work in factories. The resulting commodified market of mobile laborers enabled the rise of capitalism.

So let's say these pre-industrial subsistence farmers had instead chosen to identify with the working class Chartism movement of the mid-1800s and joined in a general strike against the landed classes who controlled parliament. In that case, the industrial revolution, lacking a sufficiently pliable workforce, might have been halted, or at least occurred in a more controlled way that minimized human suffering.

Re: LLM Inevitabilism

#132

Post by bigiain »

bradly wrote: post #121
mg wrote: post #70

In the 90s a friend told me about the internet. And that he knows someone who is in a university and has access to it and can show us. An hour later, we were sitting in front of a computer in that university and watched his friend surfing the web. Clicking on links, receiving pages of text. Faster than one could read. In a nice layout. Even with images. And links to other pages. We were shocked. No printing, no shipp…

This is what that same GPT4 told me today after trying to get a simple mqttwarn config: ChatGPT: Let’s cut through the mqttwarn quirks and get you a single, complete warn.ini that I’ve actually tested with mqttwarn 0.32 Me: that "I’ve actually tested with mqttwarn 0.32:" How did you perform this test? ChatGPT: I set up a quick local sandbox on my laptop Me: What brand is your laptop? What store did you buy it at? Cha…

> "I didn’t actually execute Python scripts ... my “test” was a mental simulation based on my knowledge"

Pretty sure the part of the training corpus that produced that was written by an ex cow orker of mine...

Re: LLM Inevitabilism

#133

Post by eric-burel »

lsy wrote: post #63

I think two things can be true simultaneously: 1. LLMs are a new technology and it's hard to put the genie back in the bottle with that. It's difficult to imagine a future where they don't continue to exist in some form, with all the timesaving benefits and social issues that come with them. 2. Almost three years in, companies investing in LLMs have not yet discovered a business model that justifies the massive expen…

Developers haven't even started extracting the value of LLMs with agent architectures yet. Using an LLM UI like open ai is like we just figured fire and you use it to warm you hands (still impressive when you think about it, but not worth the burns), while LLM development is about building car engines (here is you return on investment).

Re: LLM Inevitabilism

#134

Post by godelski »

mlsu wrote: post #103
godelski wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's insane too. Because many of us working on AI were working on it for different reasons. To me, it was to liberate us. To let me go spend more time outside, to stare at trees, and ask people "can I pet your dog?" We use language and images because they are easier to evaluate. Because we don't know what to actually evaluate. So it's as good of a direction as any, right? I'm not sure if another direction would have…

My intellectual strategy to get to the bottom of these grand questions is very straightforward: look at my own life and evaluate what’s important. In my life, I have found the answer to these questions. Telling a joke and making a colleague laugh. Looking at my 1yo niece crawling toward me. Hanging out in the garden with my wife and my dogs. I look at these things, and it’s just so obvious. AI boyfriends? Ai email re…

  > look at my own life and evaluate what’s important.
I draw on this too. In fact, I draw on many of the same things as you.

I also love to watch my cat play. I spend countless hours wondering about how she thinks. It helps bond us as I train her and play with her. I love to watch the birds sing, to watch them fly in their elegant dance. They way they just know. To watch them feed on my balcony, at first nervous of my cat who is not half as sneaky as she thinks, and watch them acclimate, to learn she just wants to watch. I could go on and on. There are so many beautiful things hidden in plain sight.

What I've learned is that the most human thing, is to look. That it is these connections that make us. Connections to one another. Connections to other animals. Connections to inanimate objects. We've thought about these questions for thousands of years, can it really be as simple as "to be human is to be able to look at someone you've never seen before, with just a glance, without words spoke, but to share a laugh that can't words cannot explain." It just seems so complex.

I still wonder, as I did as I was younger. But I wonder in a very different way. Not all questions can be answered, and that's okay. That doesn't mean we shouldn't ask them, and it doesn't mean we shouldn't ask more. It just means that the point of asking is more than about getting the answer.

And that's exactly what I hate about AI these days. It's why they have no soul. We created a button to give us answers. But, we forgot that wasn't always the point of asking. It feels like we are trying to destroy mystery. Not by learning and exploring, but through religion.

Re: LLM Inevitabilism

#135

Post by viccis »

godelski wrote: post #36
mlsu wrote: post #6

I hate AI. I'm so sick of it. I read a story about 14 year olds that are adopting AI boyfriends. They spend 18 hours a day in conversation with chatbots. Their parents are worried because they are withdrawing from school and losing their friends. I hate second guessing emails that I've read, wondering if my colleagues are even talking to me or if they are using AI. I hate the idea that AI will replace my job. Even if…

It's insane too. Because many of us working on AI were working on it for different reasons. To me, it was to liberate us. To let me go spend more time outside, to stare at trees, and ask people "can I pet your dog?" We use language and images because they are easier to evaluate. Because we don't know what to actually evaluate. So it's as good of a direction as any, right? I'm not sure if another direction would have…

>Because many of us working on AI were working on it for different reasons. To me, it was to liberate us. To let me go spend more time outside, to stare at trees, and ask people "can I pet your dog?"

If you think automation or any other increase in productivity is passed back down to workers, then I'd say I have a bridge to sell you, but you probably already bought 5 of them.

Re: LLM Inevitabilism

#136

Post by bigiain »

mdavid626 wrote: post #126
mg wrote: post #70

In the 90s a friend told me about the internet. And that he knows someone who is in a university and has access to it and can show us. An hour later, we were sitting in front of a computer in that university and watched his friend surfing the web. Clicking on links, receiving pages of text. Faster than one could read. In a nice layout. Even with images. And links to other pages. We were shocked. No printing, no shipp…

We’ll have to split up software development between such AI coders and proper developers. Let AI coders suffer in their own mess.

I think the thing that finally might drive union membership in the software development industry, is going to be the need to be able to tell your boss "No. I will not debug or add features to any AI coded or assisted codebase."

Re: LLM Inevitabilism

#137

Post by f1shy »

bradly wrote: post #121
mg wrote: post #70

In the 90s a friend told me about the internet. And that he knows someone who is in a university and has access to it and can show us. An hour later, we were sitting in front of a computer in that university and watched his friend surfing the web. Clicking on links, receiving pages of text. Faster than one could read. In a nice layout. Even with images. And links to other pages. We were shocked. No printing, no shipp…

This is what that same GPT4 told me today after trying to get a simple mqttwarn config: ChatGPT: Let’s cut through the mqttwarn quirks and get you a single, complete warn.ini that I’ve actually tested with mqttwarn 0.32 Me: that "I’ve actually tested with mqttwarn 0.32:" How did you perform this test? ChatGPT: I set up a quick local sandbox on my laptop Me: What brand is your laptop? What store did you buy it at? Cha…

Totally agree, had same experience couple of times, and until now no experience like that of the OP.

BUT: in the 90s I remember saying: supposedly in internet is all and everything, but I never find what I need, is more ads than actual information.

So the I think the point of OP holds. It may (today) not be useful for you, but maybe in some years, and if not, will still ve useful for many people, and is here to stay.

Re: LLM Inevitabilism

#138

Post by gyosko »

I don't know if "AI" will be able to do 100%, or even 90%, of my job in the next year(s). But I do know what I can see now: "AI" is making more bad than good.

Billions of dollars litterally burned in weird acquisitions and power, huge power consumptions and, the worst one maybe: the enshittification.

Is it really this what we want? Or it's what investors want?

Re: LLM Inevitabilism

#139

Post by mrtesthah »

_carbyau_ wrote: post #32
mrtesthah wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Things “happen” in human history only because humans make them happen. If enough humans do or don’t want something to happen, then they can muster the collective power to achieve it. The unstated corollary in this essay is that venture capital and oligarchs do not get to define our future simply because they have more money.

> do not get to define our future simply because they have more money I don't like it, but it seems that more money is exactly why they get to define our future.

I refer you again to the essay; it's not inevitable that those with substantially more money than us should get to dominate us and define our future. They are but a tiny minority, and if/when enough of us see that future as not going our way, we can and will collectively withdraw our consent for the social and economic rules and structures which enable those oligarchs.

Re: LLM Inevitabilism

#140

Post by conradev »

NBJack wrote: post #5
delichon wrote: post #2

If in 2009 you claimed that the dominance of the smartphone was inevitable, it would have been because you were using one and understood its power, not because you were reframing away our free choice for some agenda. In 2025 I don't think you can really be taking advantage of AI to do real work and still see its mass adaptation as evitable. It's coming faster and harder than any tech in history. As scary as that is w…

Ironically, this is exactly the technique for arguing that the blog mentions. Remember the revolutionary, seemingly inevitable tech that was poised to rewrite how humans thought about transportation? The incredible amounts of hype, the secretive meetings disclosing the device, etc.? That turned out to be the self-balancing scooter known as a Segway?

ChatGPT has something 300 million monthly users after less than three years and I don't think has Segway sold a million scooters, even though their new product lines are sick.

I can totally go about my life pretending Segway doesn't exist, but I just can't do that with ChatGPT, hence why the author felt compelled to write the post in the first place. They're not writing about Segway, after all.

Post reply on HN