I sure hope another winter is on the way, the LLM hype wagon is beyond exhausting.
A new AI winter is coming?
181–190 of 301 posts
Re: A new AI winter is coming?
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
This seems unnecessarily pedantic. We know how the system works, we just use "hallucination" colloquially when the system produces wrong output.
Other people do not, hence the danger and the responsibility of not giving them the wrong impression of what they're dealing with.
Sorry, I'm failing to see the danger of this choice of language? People who aren't really technical don't care about these nuances. It's not going to sway their opinion one way or another.
Re: A new AI winter is coming?
#183Earlier quoted context omitted.
This seems unnecessarily pedantic. We know how the system works, we just use "hallucination" colloquially when the system produces wrong output.
If the information it gives is wrong, but is grammatically correct, then the "AI" has fulfilled its purpose. So it isn't really "wrong output" because that is what the system was designed to do. The problem is when people use "AI" and expect it will produce truthful responses - it was never designed to do that.
You are preaching to the choir.
But the point is that everyone uses the phrase "hallucinations" and language is just how people use it. In this forum at least, I expect everyone to understand that it is simply the result of next token generation and not an edge case failure mode.
Re: A new AI winter is coming?
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
> something fundamental has changed that enables a computer to pretty effectively understand natural language. You understand how the tech works right? It's statistics and tokens. The computer understands nothing. Creating "understanding" would be a breakthrough. Edit: I wasn't trying to be a jerk. I sincerely wasn't. I don't "understand" how LLMs "understand" anything. I'd be super pumped to learn that bit. I don't…
As someone who was an engineer on the original Copilot team, yes I understand how tech works. You don’t know how your own mind “understands” something. No one on the planet can even describe how human understanding works. Yes, LLMs are vast statistical engines but that doesn’t mean something interesting isn’t going on. At this point I’d argue that humans “hallucinate” and/or provide wrong answers far more often than…
Before one may begin to understand something one must first be able to estimate the level of certainty. Our robot friends, while really helpful and polite, seem to be lacking in that department. They actually think the things we've written on the internet, in books, academic papers, court documents, newspapers, etc are actually true. Where the humans aren't omniscient it fills the blanks with nonsense.
Re: A new AI winter is coming?
#185Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with everything you wrote, the technology is unbelievable and 6 years ago, maybe even 3.1 years would have been considered magic. A steel man argument for why winter might be coming is all the dumb stuff companies are pushing AI for. On one hand (and I believe this) we argue it’s the most consequential technology in generations. On the other, everybody is using it for nonsense like helping you write an email…
> maybe even 3.1 years would have been considered magic I vividly remember sitting there for literally hours talking to a computer on launch day, it was a very short night. This feeling of living in the future has not left me since, it's got quieter, but it's still there. It's still magic after those three years, perhaps even more so. It wasn't supposed to work this well for decades! and yet.
[flagged]
Re: A new AI winter is coming?
#186Earlier quoted context omitted.
> something fundamental has changed that enables a computer to pretty effectively understand natural language. You understand how the tech works right? It's statistics and tokens. The computer understands nothing. Creating "understanding" would be a breakthrough. Edit: I wasn't trying to be a jerk. I sincerely wasn't. I don't "understand" how LLMs "understand" anything. I'd be super pumped to learn that bit. I don't…
As someone who was an engineer on the original Copilot team, yes I understand how tech works. You don’t know how your own mind “understands” something. No one on the planet can even describe how human understanding works. Yes, LLMs are vast statistical engines but that doesn’t mean something interesting isn’t going on. At this point I’d argue that humans “hallucinate” and/or provide wrong answers far more often than…
[flagged]
Re: A new AI winter is coming?
#187Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every time I see comments like these I think about this research from anthropic: https://www.anthropic.com/research/mapping-mind-language-mod... LLMs activate similar neurons for similar concepts not only across languages, but also across input types. I’d like to know if you’d consider that as a good representation of “understanding” and if not, how would you define it?
Anthropic is pretty notorious for peddling hype. This is a marketing article - it has not undergone peer-review and should not be mistaken for scientific research.
it has a proper paper attached right at the beginning of the article
Re: A new AI winter is coming?
#188I agree, I have over 20 years of software engineering experience and after vibe coding/engineering/architecting (or whatever you want to call it) for a couple months, I also don't see the technology progressing further. LLMs are more or less the same as 6 months ago, incremental improvements, but no meaningful progress. And what we have is just bad. I can use it because I know the exact code I want generated and I wi…
> LLMs are more or less the same as 6 months ago, incremental improvements, but no meaningful progress. Go back to a older version of a LLM and then say the same. You will notice that older LLM versions do less, have more issues, write worse code etc... There have been large jumps in the last 2 years but because its not like we go from a LLM to AGI, that people underestimate the gains. Trust me, try it, try Claude 3.…
> Trust me, try it, try Claude 3.7 > 4.0 > 4.5 > Opus 4.5 ...
I started with Sonnet 4 and now using Opus 4.5. I don't see a meaningful difference. I think I'm a bit more confident to one prompt some issues but that's it. I think the main issue is that I always knew what/how to prompt (same skill as googling) so I can adjust once I learn what a modell can do. Sonnet is kinda the same for me as Opus.
> LLMs really work the best, if you plan, plan, plan, and then have them create the code for you. The moment you try to get the LLMs work inside existing code, that is especially structured how YOU like it, people tend to be more standoffish.
My project is AI code only. Around 30k lines, I never wrote a single line. I know I cannot just let it vibe code because I lost a month getting rid of AI spaghetti that it created in the beginning. It just got stuck rewriting and making new bugs as soon as it fixed one. Since then I'm doing a lot more handholding and a crazy amount of unit/e2e testing. Which btw. is a huge limiting factor. Now I want powerful dev machine again because if unit + e2e testing takes more than a couple seconds it slows down LLMs.
> Pricing is how you look at it... If i do the work what takes me a months in a few days, what is the price then?
I spent around 200 USD on subscriptions so far. I wanted to try out Opus 4.5 so I splurged on a Claude Max subscription this month. It's definitely a very expensive hobby.
> And its ironically often the seasoned guys that complain the most about AI
I think because we understand what it can do.
Re: A new AI winter is coming?
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anthropic is pretty notorious for peddling hype. This is a marketing article - it has not undergone peer-review and should not be mistaken for scientific research.
it has a proper paper attached right at the beginning of the article
It’s not peer-reviewed, and was never accepted by a scientific journal. It’s a marketing paper masquerading as science.
Re: A new AI winter is coming?
#190This article uses the computational complexity hammer way too hard, discounts huge progress in every field of AI outside of the hot trend of transformers and LLMs. Nobody is saying the future of AI is autoregressive and this article pretty much ignores any of the research that has been posted here around diffusion based text generation or how it can be combined with autoregressive methods… discounts multi-modal model…
I agree with everything you wrote, the technology is unbelievable and 6 years ago, maybe even 3.1 years would have been considered magic. A steel man argument for why winter might be coming is all the dumb stuff companies are pushing AI for. On one hand (and I believe this) we argue it’s the most consequential technology in generations. On the other, everybody is using it for nonsense like helping you write an email…
> I agree with everything you wrote, the technology is unbelievable and 6 years ago, maybe even 3.1 years would have been considered magic.
People said the same thing about ELIZA in 1967.