Live data from Hacker News

AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

rakhim.exotext.com

21–30 of 190 posts

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#21
post #13

I think every field has its own version of this thought, where if we could just manage to categorise and tag things properly we could achieve anything. Our lack of a valid overarching ontology is what is holding us back from greatness. It might be short lived, who knows, but it's interesting that the recent progress came from capturing/consuming rather than systematically eliminating the nuance in language.

Every field including library science? ;)

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#22
post #5

I have often thought about how computers are significantly faster than they were in the early 2000s, but they are significantly harder to use. Using Linux for the first time in college was a revelation, because it gave me the tools to tell the computer "rename all of the files in this directory, keeping only the important parts of the name." But instead of iterating on better interfaces to effectively utilize the N t…

IDK, I think there is something adorable about taking a system that over trillions of iterations always performs the same operation with the same result, reliability unmatched in all of the universe…

And making it more of “IDK what it answered the way it did, but it might be right!!”

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#23
Fresh plums right off the tree taste significantly better than the ones you can get in the produce isle, which are in turn better than canned, which are themselves still better than re-hydrated prunes.

In scaling out computation to the masses, we went from locally grown plums that took a lot of work and were only available to a small number of people that had a plum tree or knew someone that had one, to building near magical prune-cornucopia devices that everyone could carry around in their pockets, giving them an effectively unlimited supply of prunes.

LLMs re-hydrate these for us, making them significantly more palatable; if you're used to gnawing dried fruit, they seem amazing.

But there's still a lot of work to be done.

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#24
post #7

Expresses a longing for the semantic web. > Remember Semantic Web? The web was supposed to evolve into semantically structured, linked, machine-readable data that would enable amazing opportunities. That never happened. I think the lesson to be learned is in answering the question "Why didn't the semantic web happen?"

"Why didn't the semantic web happen?" I have literally been doing we development since their was a web, and the companies I developed for are openly hostile to the idea of putting their valuable, or perceived valuable, information online in a format that could be easily scraped. Information doesn't want to be free, it wants to be paid for. Unless the information shared pulls visitors to the site it doesn't need to be…

I've encountered a similar issue in academia - PI's don't want to make their data available to be scraped (or, at least not easily) because the amount of grant funding is limited, and a rival who has scraped one's data could get the grant money instead by using that scraped data to bolster their application.

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#25
I always appreciate our weekly Crankypants Take on LLMs.

> AI is not a triumph of elegant design, but a brute-force workaround

You can read and understand Attention Is All You Need in one hour, and then (after just scaling out by a few billion) a computer talks to you like a human. Pretty elegant, if you ask me.

> The web was supposed to evolve into semantically structured, linked, machine-readable data that would enable amazing opportunities.

I missed that memo. The web was, and forever shall be, a giant, unstructured, beautiful mess. In fact, LLMs show just how hopeless the semantic web approach was. Yes, it's useful to attach metadata to objects, but you will still need massive layering and recursion to derive higher-order, non-trivial information.

This entire article is someone unable to let go of an old idea that Did Not Work.

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#26

I'm pretty sure AI _is_ "personal computing". One can speak in their native language to a computer now and it mostly understands what is meant and can retrieve information or even throw together a scaffold of a project somewhat reliably. It's not particularly good at writing software, however. Still feels like a human is needed to make sure it doesn't generate nonsense or apparently pretty insecure code. So I'm not s…

Yes, I rolled my eyes about the sneering of the author.

By the way: His blog getting a few dozen hn comments is only impressive, because he failed to write a better blog.

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#27
Alan Kay has also written about his disappointment with what personal computing delivered. I think he'd agree with this.

Most people can't use the power of the computers they have effectively. Maintaining the data in Excel spreadsheets for most people is like manual labour.

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#28
post #5

I have often thought about how computers are significantly faster than they were in the early 2000s, but they are significantly harder to use. Using Linux for the first time in college was a revelation, because it gave me the tools to tell the computer "rename all of the files in this directory, keeping only the important parts of the name." But instead of iterating on better interfaces to effectively utilize the N t…

Is counting the number of B's vital? Also, I'm pretty sure you can get an LLM to parse text the way you want it, it just doesn't see your text as you do, so that simple operation is not straightforward. Similarly, are you worthless because you seem like you understand language but are incapable of counting the number of octects in "blueberry"?

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#29
Another angle: we're super over provisioned in compute resources because of reasonable limitations in how quickly we can collectively absorb and learn how to use computers. "AI" is simply a new paradigm in our understanding of how to program computers. This isn't a failure, it's just an evolution.

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#30
Yeah dream on. I’m an engineer and know what structured data is. And yet I miserably fail to store my private files in a way that I can find them back without relying on search tools. So how on earth are we ever going to organize all the world’s data and knowledge? Thank god we found this sub-optimal “band aid” called LLMs!
Post reply on HN