Why slow? Because to run a large model it takes many expensive GPUs or API costs.
Therby limiting the amount of people who can experiment with it.
Why is AI so slow to spread?
91–100 of 189 posts
Re: Why is AI so slow to spread?
#92I 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…
Single point of failure?
Yeah u can download the entirety of Wikipedia if you want to. What's the single point of failure?
Re: Why is AI so slow to spread?
#93I spent a bit of time reviewing and cleaning up the mess of someone who had taken text that I'd carefully written, put it through an AI to make it more "impactful", and revising it to remove the confusions and things I hadn't said. The text the AI wrote was certainly impactful, but it was also exaggerated and wrong in several places. So did AI add value here? It seems to me that it wasted a bunch of my time.
This sounds more like bad editing regardless if they used an LLM or not.
For me, I can now skip the step of handing something to marketing/editor who wants to make it more impactful because I use AI up front do that - including making sure it's still correct and says what I want it to say.
Re: Why is AI so slow to spread?
#94Slow?? 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.
They mean slow to actually be used by people. Doesn't matter that it's shoved everywhere if in the end there are 0 users clicking the magic wand icon.
This is it. I don't want to use some kind of AI search in fb messenger, I want to find someone to send them a message. I don't need AI search in google, I don't need it in gmail. What I need is search that actually works, there is no need to replace existing search functionality with "AI".
It is shoved everywhere but nobody really needs it.
Re: Why is AI so slow to spread?
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
Franklin Community Credit Union scandal is a good example, well outlined in this youtuber's (admittedly dramatized) video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0yIGG-taFI
Re: Why is AI so slow to spread?
#96I 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…
Fun test: ask chatgtp to find where Wikipedia is wrong about a subject. It does not go well, proving that it is far less trustworthy than wikipedia alone.
(Most AI will simply find where twitter disagrees with Wikipedia and spout out ridiculousness conspiracy junk.)
Re: Why is AI so slow to spread?
#97I 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…
One of the issues certainly is that Stackoverflow is absolutely over. Within the last twelve months the number of users just fell off a cliff.
Re: Why is AI so slow to spread?
#98Because other industries don't have pre-existing human written compilers, linters, analyzers, etc. which LLMs leverage to purge their output of the garbage and validate result using some strict rules. Programming just got unlucky with the existing advanced set of the tools and limited language grammar.
Re: Why is AI so slow to spread?
#99Slow?? 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.
I completely agree. It's an enforced spread, but still.
Re: Why is AI so slow to spread?
#100I 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 have been using it for coding for some time, but I don't think I'm getting much value out of it.
I find this perspective so hard to relate to. LLMs have completely changed my workflow; the majority of my coding has been replaced by writing a detailed textual description of the change I want, letting an LLM make the change and add tests, then just reviewing the code it wrote and fixing anything stupid it did. This saves so much time, especially since multiple such LLM tasks can be run simultaneously. But maybe it's because I'm not working on giant, monolithic code bases.