He describes his startup as an ai-oriented map... to me that sounds amazing and totally at my alley. But then it's actually about trip planning... to me is too constrained and specific. What I would love is a map type experience that gives me an AI type interface for interesting things in any given area that might be near me and worth checking out. And not just for travel by the way... I love just exploring maps and…
Everyone in Seattle hates AI
681–690 of 1001 posts
Re: Everyone in Seattle hates AI
#682Earlier quoted context omitted.
> [...] a large number of places where LLMs make apparently-effective tools that have negative long-term consequences (see: anything involving learning a new skill, [...] Don't people learn from imperfect teachers all the time?
Yes, they do. In fact, imperfect teachers can sometimes induce more learning than more perfect ones. And that's what is insidious about learning from AI. It looks like something we've seen before, something where we know how to make it useful and take advantage even of the gaps and inadequacies. AI can be effective for learning a new skill, but you have to be constantly on your guard to prevent it from hacking your b…
That was true in chess for a long time, but since at least 20 years or so, approximately anytime the human deviates from what the AI suggests, it's a mistake.
Re: Everyone in Seattle hates AI
#683Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've generally found an inverse correlation between "understands AI" and "exuberance for AI". I'm the only person at my current company who has had experience at multiple AI companies (the rest have never worked on it in a production environment, one of our projects is literally something I got paid to deliver customers at another startup), has written professionally about the topic, and worked directly with some big…
This completely explains why so many engineers are skeptical of AI while so many managers embrace it: The engineers are the ones who understand it. (BTW, if you're an engineer who thinks you don't understand AI or are not qualified to work on it, think again. It's just linear algebra, and linear algebra is not that hard. Once you spend a day studying it, you'll think "Is that all there is to it?" The only difficult p…
Curiously some Feynman chap reported that several NASA engineers put the chance of the Challenger going kablooie—an untechnical term for rapid unscheduled deconstruction, which the Challenger had then just recently exhibited—at 1 in 200, or so, while the manager said, after some prevarications—"weaseled" is Feynman's term—that the chance was 1 in 100,000 with 100% confidence.
Re: Everyone in Seattle hates AI
#684Earlier quoted context omitted.
My friends at Google are some of the most negative about the potential of AI to improve software development. I was always surprised by this and assumed internally at Google would be one of the first places to adopt these.
I've generally found an inverse correlation between "understands AI" and "exuberance for AI". I'm the only person at my current company who has had experience at multiple AI companies (the rest have never worked on it in a production environment, one of our projects is literally something I got paid to deliver customers at another startup), has written professionally about the topic, and worked directly with some big…
I don't know shit about the math that makes it work, but my mental model is basically - "A LLM is an additional tool in my toolbox which performs summarization, classification and text transformation tasks for me imperfectly, but overall pretty well."
Probably lots of flaws in that model but I just try to think like an engineer who's attempting to get a job done and staying up to date on his tooling.
But as you say there are people who have been fooled by the "AI" angle of all this, and they think they're witnessing the birth of a machine god or something. The example that really makes me throw up my hands is r/MyBoyfriendIsAI where you have women agreeing to marry the LLM and other nonsense that is unfathomable to the mentally well.
There's always been a subset of humans who believe unimaginably stupid things, like that there's a guy in the sky who throws lightning bolts when he's angry, or whatever. The interesting (as in frightening) trend in modernity is that instead of these moron cults forming around natural phenomena we're increasingly forming them around things that are human made. Sometimes we form them around the state and human leaders, increasingly we're forming them around technologies, in line with Arthur C. Clarke's third law - that "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
If I sound harsh it's because I am, we don't want these moron cults to win, the outcome would be terrible, some high tech version of the Dark Ages. Yet at this moment we have business and political leaders and countless run-of-the-mill tech world grifters who are leaning into the moron cult version of AI rather than encouraging people to just see it as another tool in the box.
Re: Everyone in Seattle hates AI
#685The thing about dismissing AI in 2025 is that it's on par with dismissing the wearable computing group at MIT in the 1980s. But admittedly, if one had tried to productize their stuff in the 1980s it would have been hilarious. So the rewards here are going to go to the people who read the right tea leaves and follow the right path to what's inevitable. In the short term, a lot of not so smart, people are going to lose…
Re: Everyone in Seattle hates AI
#686Earlier quoted context omitted.
If a tool makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot, then it's not a good tool. See C++.
I'm no apologist but this statement doesn't ring for me. It's easy to shock yourself with electricity, is it a bad tool?
A tool is something designed by humans. We don't get to design electricity, but we do get to design the systems we put in place around it.
Gravity isn't a tool, but stairs are, and there are good and bad stairs.
Re: Everyone in Seattle hates AI
#687Well written! I’m Seattle based (although at Google) I think the mood is only slightly better than what you describe. But the general feeling that the company has no interest in engineering innovation is alive and well. Everything needs to be standardized and engineers get shuffled between products in a way that discourages domain knowledge.
Re: Everyone in Seattle hates AI
#688Ex-Google here; there are many people both current and past-Google that feel the same way as the composite coworker in the linked post. I haven't escaped this mindset myself. I'm convinced there are a small number of places where LLMs make truly effective tools (see: generation of "must be plausible, need not be accurate" data, e.g. concept art or crowd animations in movies), a large number of places where LLMs make…
This includes IME the initial stages of art creation (the planning, not generating, stage). It's kind of like having someone to bounce ideas off of at 3am. It's a convenient way of trigging your own brain to be inspired.
Re: Everyone in Seattle hates AI
#689wow — this hit me hard. I live in Seattle, and got laid off from Microsoft as a PM in Jan of this year. Tried in early 2024 to demonstrate how we could leverage smaller models (such as Mixtral) to improve documentation and tailor code samples for our auth libraries. The usual “fiefdom” politics took over and the project never gained steam. I do feel like I was put in a certain “non-AI” category and my career stalled,…