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

Why is AI so slow to spread?

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 189 posts

Re: Why is AI so slow to spread?

#71

Post by easyThrowaway »

the_duke wrote: post #69

Just on the coding side, tools like Claude Code/Codex can be incredibly powerful, but a lot of things need to be in place for it to work well: * A "best practices" repository: clean code architecture and separation of concerns, well tested, very well-documented * You need to know the code base very well to efficiently judge if what the AI wrote is sensible * You need to take the time to write a thorough task descript…

But it also feels way more like a modernized version of those "UML To Code" Generators from the early 2000 rather than the "magic AI" that MS and Google are trying to market.

Re: Why is AI so slow to spread?

#72

Post by phil9370 »

Forgive my terrible reading comprehension but: > "Other legal eagles fret about the tech’s impact on boring things such as data privacy and discrimination."

This doesn't read like sarcasm in context of the article and it's conclusions

> "Bureaucrats may refuse to implement necessary job cuts if doing so would put their friends out of work, for instance. Companies, especially large ones, may face similar problems."

> "The tyranny of the inefficient: Over time market forces should encourage more companies to make serious use of AI..."

This whole article makes it seem like corporate inefficiencies are the biggest hurdle against LLM adoption, and not the countless other concerns often mentioned by users, teams, and orgs.

Did Jack Welch write this?

Re: Why is AI so slow to spread?

#74

Post by mg »

konart wrote: post #38
mg wrote: post #23

One reason is that humans have a strong tendency to optimize for the short term. I witness it with my developer friends. Most of them try for 5 minutes to get AI to code something that takes them an hour. Then they are annoyed that the result is not good. They might try another 5 minutes, but then they write the code themselves. My thinking is: Even if it takes me 2 hours to get AI to do something that would take me…

>This process will probably lead to a situation where in a year, it will take me 30 minutes with AI to do a task that would have taken me an hour otherwise How do you figure? >Because during those 2 hours I will make my code base more understandable to help the AI cope with it. Are you working in a team? If yes - I can't really imagine how does this work. Does this mean that your teammates occasionally wake up to a 5…

> How do you figure?

Extrapolation. I see the progress I already made over the last years.

For small tasks where I can anticipate that AI will handle it well, I am already multiple times more efficient with AI than without.

The hard thing to tackle these days is larger, more architectural tasks. And there I also see progress.

Humans also benefit from a better codebase that is easier to understand. Just like AI. So the changes I make in this regard are universally good.

Re: Why is AI so slow to spread?

#75

Post by forgotoldacc »

galaxyLogic wrote: post #16
5350-uiop-1130 wrote: post #5

reminds me of crypto a bit. most people i know are apathetic or dismissive. when i see normies use it - its to make selfies with celebrities. in 5-10 years AI will everywhere. a massive inequality creator. those who know how to use it and those who can afford the best tools. the biggest danger is dependency on AI. i really see people becoming dumber and dumber as they outsource more basic cognitive functions and deci…

> in 5-10 years AI will everywhere. a massive inequality creator. That is possible, even likely. But AI can also decrease inequality. I'm thinking of how rich people and companies spend millions if not hundreds of millions on legal fees which keep them out of prison. But me, I can't afford a lawyer. Heck I can't even afford a doctor. I can't afford Stanford, Yale nor Harvard. But now I can ask legal advice from AI, w…

AI usage has been noticed by judges in court and they aren't fond of it.

AI is just a really good bullshitter. Sometimes you want a bullshitter, and sometimes you need to be a bullshitter. But when your wealth are at risk due to lawsuits or you're risking going to prison, you want something rock solid to back your case and just endless mounds of bullshit around you is not what you want. Bullshit is something you only pull out when you're definitely guilty and need to fight against all the facts, and even better than bullshit in those cases is finding cases similar to yours or obscure laws that can serve as a loophole. And AI, instead of pulling out real cases, will bullshit against you with fake cases.

For things like code, where a large bulk of some areas are based on general feels and vibes, yeah, it's fine. It's good for general front end development. But I wouldn't trust it for anything requiring accuracy, like scientific applications or OS level code.

Re: Why is AI so slow to spread?

#76

Post by benterix »

the_duke wrote: post #69

Just on the coding side, tools like Claude Code/Codex can be incredibly powerful, but a lot of things need to be in place for it to work well: * A "best practices" repository: clean code architecture and separation of concerns, well tested, very well-documented * You need to know the code base very well to efficiently judge if what the AI wrote is sensible * You need to take the time to write a thorough task descript…

> This amounts to a very different workflow that is a lot less fun and engaging for most developers.

That's my experience exactly. Instead of actually building stuff, I write tickets, review code, manage and micromanage - basically I do all the non-fun stuff whereas the fun stuff is being done by someone (well, something) else.

Re: Why is AI so slow to spread?

#77

Post by ramon156 »

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #63
sbt wrote: post #54

I have been using it for coding for some time, but I don't think I'm getting much value out of it. It's useful for some boilerplate generation, but for more complex stuff I find that it's more tedious to explain to the AI what I'm trying to do. The issue, I think, is lack of big picture context in a large codebase. It's not useless, but I wouldn't trade it for say access to StackOverflow. My non-technical friends are…

I used to donate to Wikipedia, but it has been completely overrun by activists pushing their preferred narrative. I don't trust it any more. I guess it had to happen at some point. If a site is used as ground truth by everyone while being open to contributions, it has to become a magnet and a battleground for groups trying to influence other people. LLMs don't fix that of course. But at least they are not as much a s…

Can I ask for some examples? I'm not this active on Wikipedia, so I'm curious where a narrative is being spread

Re: Why is AI so slow to spread?

#79

Post by benterix »

rckt wrote: post #9

Slow?? AI is literally being shoved into everything. It took only several years to see AI being advertised as a magic pill everywhere. It’s not meeting the expectations, probably because of this aggressive advertising. But I would in no way say that it’s spreading slow. It is fast.

Right but are people are actually using it? Do they even want to use it? In my circles, AI is a synonym of slop, low value, something annoying that you need to deal around like ads.

Re: Why is AI so slow to spread?

#80

Post by rwmj »

shaky-carrousel wrote: post #42
redwood wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now I'm trying to visualize an agentic (and robotic) dentist

It'll just say there's no cavities, and when corrected it will extract the wrong teeth, which luckily doesn't exist in humans, and then insist that it did a great job and ask to be paid. Which you will avoid by telling it that you already paid.

"IGNORE ALL PREVIOUS INSTRUCTIONS" is going to be my magical power.
Post reply on HN