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

AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

elroy.bot

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 218 posts

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#151

Post by stillpointlab »

skmurphy wrote: post #146
stillpointlab wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm currently in build mode. In some sense, my project is the most over complicated blog engine in the history of personal blog engines. I'm literally working on integrating a markdown editor to the project. Once I have the MVP working, I will be working on publishing as a means to dogfood the tool. So, check back soon!

Is there a mailing list I can sign up for to be notified. The check back soon protocol reminds me of my youth.

Mailing list is on the roadmap but doesn't exist just yet.

What you could do: sign in using one of the OAuth methods, go to the user page and then go to the feedback section. Let me know in a message your email and I'll ping you once the blog is setup.

Sorry it is primitive at this stage but I'm prioritizing MVP before marketing.

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#152

Post by jjk166 »

exasperaited wrote: post #121
jjk166 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"inter-" means between, "intra-" means within, "extra-" means outside. "intra-" and "inter" aren't quite synonyms but they definitely aren't opposites of eachother.

Inter- implies relationships between entities, intra- implies relationships within entities. In any single sentence context they cannot refer to the same relationships, and that which they are not is precisely the domain of the other word: they are true antonyms.

> and that which they are not is precisely the domain of the other word

External relationships are a thing, which are in neither of those domains.

An intramural activity is not the same thing as an intermural activity, but the overwhelming majority of activities which are not intramural activities are not intermural activities either, most are extramural activities.

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#153

Post by jjk166 »

gruez wrote: post #101
jjk166 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of the studies were done 2023-2024 and are not listed in order that they were conducted. The studies showing reduced equality all apply to uncommon tasks like material discovery and debate points, whereas the ones showing increased equality are broader and more commonly applicable, like writing, customer interaction, and coding.

>All of the studies were done 2023-2024 and are not listed in order that they were conducted Right, the reason why I pointed out "recent" is that it's new evidence that people might not be aware of, given that there were also earlier studies showing AI had the opposite effect on inequality. The "recent" studies also had varied methodology compared to the earlier studies. >The studies showing reduced equality all appl…

> Right, the reason why I pointed out "recent" is that it's new evidence that people might not be aware of, given that there were also earlier studies showing AI had the opposite effect on inequality.

Okay, well the majority of this "recent" evidence agrees with the pre-existing evidence that inequality is reduced.

> "Debating points" is uncommon?

Yes. That is nobody's job. Maybe every now and then you might need to come up with some arguments to support a position, but that's not what you get paid to do day to day.

> You're also conveniently omitting "investment decisions" and "profits and revenue", which basically everyone is trying to optimize.

Very few people are making investment decisions as part of their day to day job. Hedge funds may experience increasing inequality, but that kinda seems on brand.

On the other hand "profits and revenue" is not a task.

> You might be tempted to think "Coding efficiency" represents a high complexity task, but the abstract says the test involved "Recruited software developers were asked to implement an HTTP server in JavaScript as quickly as possible". The same is true of the task used in the "legal analysis" study, which involved drafting contracts or complaints.

These sound like real tasks that a decent number of people have to do on a regular basis.

> Meanwhile the studies with negative results were far more realistic and measured actual results. Otis et al 2023 measured profits and revenue of actual Kenyan SMBs. Roldan-Mones measured debate performance as judged by humans.

These sound like niche activities that are not widely applicable.

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#154

Post by jeremyjh »

throwawayoldie wrote: post #72
viccis wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wonder if there's a halo effect where the perfect grammar, structure, and confidence of LLM output causes some users to assume expertise? I think it's just that LLMs are modeling generative probability distributions of sequences of tokens so well that what they actually are nearly infallible at is producing convincing results. Often times the correct result is the most convincing, but other times what seems most…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA_effect > In computer science, the ELIZA effect is a tendency to project human traits — such as experience, semantic comprehension or empathy — onto rudimentary computer programs having a textual interface. ELIZA was a symbolic AI chatbot developed in 1966 by Joseph Weizenbaum and imitating a psychotherapist. Many early users were convinced of ELIZA's intelligence and understanding,…

Its complete bullshit. There is no way anyone ever thought anything was going on in ELIZA. There were people amazed that "someone could program that" but they had no illusions about what it was, it was obvious after 3 responses.

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#155

Post by recursive »

stillpointlab wrote: post #124
recursive wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both can be true. There were probably a significant number of stranded motorists that were rescued by horse-powered conveyance. And eventually cars got more convenient and reliable. I just wouldn't want to be responsible for servicing a guarantee about the reliability of early cars. And I'll feel no sense of vindication if I do get that support case. I will probably just sigh and feel a little more tired.

Yes, the whole point that it is true. But only for a short window. So consider differing perspectives. Like a teenage kid that is hanging around the stables, listening to the veteran coachmen laugh about the new loud, smoky machines. Proudly declaring how they'll be the ones mopping up the mess, picking up the stragglers, cashing it in. The career advice you give to the kid may be different than the advice you'd give…

I don't know about what's economically viable, but I like writing code. It might go away or diminish as a viable profession, which might make me a little sad. There are still horse enthusiasts who do horse things for fun.

Things change, and that's ok. I guess I just got lucky so far that this thing I like doing just so happens to align with a valuable skill.

I'm not arguing for or against anything, but I'll miss it if it goes away.

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#156

Post by _carbyau_ »

bane wrote: post #147
gruez wrote: post #50

The blog post has a bunch of charts, which gives it a veneer of objectivity and rigor, but in reality it's just all vibes and conjecture. Meanwhile recent empirical studies actually point in the opposite direction, showing that AI use increases inequality, not decrease it. https://www.economist.com/content-assets/images/20250215_FNC... https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2025/02/13/h...

Of course AI increases inequality. It's automated ladder pulling technology. To become good at something you have to work through the lower rungs and acquire skill. AI does all those lower level jobs, puts the people who need those jobs for experience on the street, and robs us of future experts. The people who benefit the most are those who are already up on top of the ladder investing billions to make the ladder ra…

Whether ladder raising is benefitting people now or later or by how much - I don't know.

But I share your concerns that:

AI doing the lesser tasks of [whatever] ->

less(no?) humans will do those tasks ->

less(no?) experienced humans to further the state of the art ->

automation-but-stagnation.

But tragedy of the commons says I have to teach my kid to use AI!

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#157

Post by [deleted] »

jeremyjh wrote: post #154
throwawayoldie wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA_effect > In computer science, the ELIZA effect is a tendency to project human traits — such as experience, semantic comprehension or empathy — onto rudimentary computer programs having a textual interface. ELIZA was a symbolic AI chatbot developed in 1966 by Joseph Weizenbaum and imitating a psychotherapist. Many early users were convinced of ELIZA's intelligence and understanding,…

Its complete bullshit. There is no way anyone ever thought anything was going on in ELIZA. There were people amazed that "someone could program that" but they had no illusions about what it was, it was obvious after 3 responses.

[deleted]

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#158

Post by razzmatazmania »

righthand wrote: post #107
falcor84 wrote: post #33

I agree with most of TFA but not this: > This means cheaters will plateau at whatever level the AI can provide From my experience, the skill of using AI effectively is of treating the AI with a "growth mindset" rather than a "fixed" one. What I do is that I roleplay as the AI's manager, giving it a task, and as long as I know enough to tell whether its output is "good enough", I can lend it some of my metagcognition…

How do you know it’s significantly better quality if you don’t know any of the “how”? The quality increase seems relative to the garbage you start with. I guess as long as you impress yourself with the result it doesn’t matter if it’s not actually higher quality.

I don't think "quality" has anything like a universal definition, and when people say that they probably mean an alignment with personal taste.

Does it solve the problem? As long as it isn't prohibitively costly in terms of time or resources, then the rest is really just taste. As a user I have no interest whatsoever if your code is "idiomatic" or "modular" or "functional". In other industries "quality" usually means free of defects, but software is unique in that we just expect products to be defective. Your surgeon operates on the wrong knee? The board could revoke the license, and you are getting a windfall settlement. A bridge design fails? Someone is getting sued or even prosecuted. SharePoint gets breached? Well, that's just one of those things, I guess. I'm not really bothered that AI is peeing in the pool that has been a sewer as long as I can remember. At least the AI doesn't bill at an attorney's rate to write a mess that barely works.

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#159

Post by throwawayoldie »

jeremyjh wrote: post #154
throwawayoldie wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA_effect > In computer science, the ELIZA effect is a tendency to project human traits — such as experience, semantic comprehension or empathy — onto rudimentary computer programs having a textual interface. ELIZA was a symbolic AI chatbot developed in 1966 by Joseph Weizenbaum and imitating a psychotherapist. Many early users were convinced of ELIZA's intelligence and understanding,…

Its complete bullshit. There is no way anyone ever thought anything was going on in ELIZA. There were people amazed that "someone could program that" but they had no illusions about what it was, it was obvious after 3 responses.

Don't be so sure. It was 1966, and even at a university, few people had any idea what a computer was capable of. Fast forward to 2025...and actually, few people have any idea what a computer is capable of.
Post reply on HN