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

Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

superuserdone.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 118 posts

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#11

Post by atq2119 »

bigmattystyles wrote: post #8
simianwords wrote: post #5

> Anthropic claims AI will replace industry X in Y months False, Anthropic didn’t claim what was linked in the article. > OpenAI CEO Sam Altman speculates that enough AI compute could help figure out how to cure cancer Idk likely true? What’s so wrong here. > Elon Musk says there will be no need for compilers as AI will write the binary directly What seems so off about this? AI can write binary and probably better in…

> > Elon Musk says there will be no need for compilers as AI will write the binary directly Wouldn’t that make the AI the compiler?

Right. There is something interesting here that could be explored thoughtfully. The hard part is that we rely on compilers being correct, and they mostly are.

We have no viable mechanism yet to get the same level of confidence if some LLM-based system writes the binary.

Perhaps we can get to a system that produces not just the binary but also a machine-verifiable proof that the binary implements some higher-level language description of the program.

Though then the question will be whether we've gained anything, or whether we've just replaced the compiler with something massively more expensive that does the same thing.

There's some potential here for the LLM-based system to drive better performance optimizations than a regular compiler could.

Of course this isn't what Elon is actually saying, and we'd be better off if fewer people listened to him.

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#12

Post by general_reveal »

When I think about the typical team composition needed to build a typical app in a lot of companies, well, actually what do I think about? I think, okay, that’s how many people we need to build a typical app - some number. That’s what we should all think … like, what is that “number” of people we need?

So, today, if I think really really really, and I mean, really fucking hard about that “number”, I really really really come up with a number close to 1 (we need one person to type in the instruction at least, maybe two? Maybe three? Definitely not a team … no not that at all).

That means, for everything that we build today, before we even build it, we’ve already mentally replaced people. People be replaced yo, in your mind, in your company, in your reality. That’s it.

It’s a replacement, not a tool. And if you reaaallly think a bit more, you’ll see that it is truly the stupidest possible thing if in your scoping of what needs to be built, you didn’t scope out people. You’d have to be crazy not to scope out people.

Trust me, I never thought we’d get to this point either. I thought it was going to be an “assistant” too.

—-

The layoff numbers still look “normal “ to us. 75k here, 20k there, all numbers we’ve heard before. It hasn’t even really happened yet, the true numbers should be in millions. I didn’t believe the number “trillion dollar company” until, BAM, here’s a trillion dollar company.

Best we can do is kinda get used to the numbers, like the number 0 on one end (how many people you need), and some number N (in millions) that we won’t need anymore. We’ll just slowly get used to these new numbers.

This shit ain’t no tool.

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#13

Post by PedroBatista »

ttoinou wrote: post #3
Herring wrote: post #2

The problem is not AI. It's an excellent technology. The problem is there's an underlying power grab (e.g. layoffs). When humans do that to each other they inherently dehumanize/invalidate/insult each other. Implement strong labor protections or basic income and a lot of this dog-eat-dog toxicity goes away.

Automating a job is toxic now ?

It can be.

Because most automations never capture the complete scope of the job/task ( not even close ). Just like neurons, if you don't use it you lose it and when the inevitable problems come, nobody knows the why, the how and the what. At that point someone smart would incorporate all those real costs and opportunity loses on the "automating everything" equation. But they usually don't.

Of course automating tasks is a must, but it's very far from being a black and white situation. These dynamics have been happening for centuries by now, nothing new.

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#14

Post by overgard »

ttoinou wrote: post #3
Herring wrote: post #2

The problem is not AI. It's an excellent technology. The problem is there's an underlying power grab (e.g. layoffs). When humans do that to each other they inherently dehumanize/invalidate/insult each other. Implement strong labor protections or basic income and a lot of this dog-eat-dog toxicity goes away.

Automating a job is toxic now ?

Depends on the scale and the technology. If the answer is "all of white collar workers" then I would argue it's very toxic. (I don't think it can do that, but it's hard not to get the impression that it's absolutely the goal). I haven't really heard of a stable society with 50% unemployment and zero social safety net.

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#15

Post by prakharjain »

I was earlier of the belief, Oh my god, now nothing is impossible. Ai can market, ai can create video, ai can sell, i can build and make a great product. we will win.

I realized all this was quite wrong, AI just helps people who already know become more efficient. It just gives confidence to people who dont know anything by the sycophantic nature of AI. AI is just a tool for smart people to become smarter.

Love AI and what it allows us to do. But, it does give some superpowers, but the problems that existed before still do and they need to be solved for. with or without AI.

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#16

Post by overgard »

bigmattystyles wrote: post #8
simianwords wrote: post #5

> Anthropic claims AI will replace industry X in Y months False, Anthropic didn’t claim what was linked in the article. > OpenAI CEO Sam Altman speculates that enough AI compute could help figure out how to cure cancer Idk likely true? What’s so wrong here. > Elon Musk says there will be no need for compilers as AI will write the binary directly What seems so off about this? AI can write binary and probably better in…

> > Elon Musk says there will be no need for compilers as AI will write the binary directly Wouldn’t that make the AI the compiler?

People love non-deterministic compilers.

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#17

Post by sublinear »

overgard wrote: post #14
ttoinou wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Automating a job is toxic now ?

Depends on the scale and the technology. If the answer is "all of white collar workers" then I would argue it's very toxic. (I don't think it can do that, but it's hard not to get the impression that it's absolutely the goal). I haven't really heard of a stable society with 50% unemployment and zero social safety net.

I don't think anyone ever really believed it would replace ordinary jobs. That angle was meant to appeal to emotion and distract the public from the shady deals and big defense spending.

Think about all the security clearances no longer required to aggregate big data into intelligence reports. The conditions and incentives for LLMs seem almost laser focused on replacing those particular jobs.

It wasn't but ~20 years ago that people were concerned about Google slurping up all the world's data into spying programs. Now that the hardest part to hide is happening, people have forgotten or assumed it already had. Many other smaller and far less capable businesses have come and gone and taken tiny bits of blame until the public was satisfied they knew who the "real" scapegoats were. What they really had were overcomplicated theories built on a nebulous cloud of debatable evidence that led nowhere. This is how it succeeds in plain sight every time.

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#18

Post by [deleted] »

bigmattystyles wrote: post #8
simianwords wrote: post #5

> Anthropic claims AI will replace industry X in Y months False, Anthropic didn’t claim what was linked in the article. > OpenAI CEO Sam Altman speculates that enough AI compute could help figure out how to cure cancer Idk likely true? What’s so wrong here. > Elon Musk says there will be no need for compilers as AI will write the binary directly What seems so off about this? AI can write binary and probably better in…

> > Elon Musk says there will be no need for compilers as AI will write the binary directly Wouldn’t that make the AI the compiler?

[deleted]

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#19

Post by overgard »

general_reveal wrote: post #12

When I think about the typical team composition needed to build a typical app in a lot of companies, well, actually what do I think about? I think, okay, that’s how many people we need to build a typical app - some number. That’s what we should all think … like, what is that “number” of people we need? So, today, if I think really really really, and I mean, really fucking hard about that “number”, I really really rea…

I think if you use AI to automate talking to customers, you're going to stop having customers. If you use AI to do your engineering and deployments, it's up to you to fix it when it goes wrong. If you use it for accounting, you BETTER look at the results if you don't want to be audited. If the AI handles legal, same thing. Basically, if it replaces N people, then you, the one person, need to be accountable for being able to handle N people's roles, because the AI can't take accountability.

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#20

Post by overgard »

atq2119 wrote: post #11
bigmattystyles wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > Elon Musk says there will be no need for compilers as AI will write the binary directly Wouldn’t that make the AI the compiler?

Right. There is something interesting here that could be explored thoughtfully. The hard part is that we rely on compilers being correct, and they mostly are. We have no viable mechanism yet to get the same level of confidence if some LLM-based system writes the binary. Perhaps we can get to a system that produces not just the binary but also a machine-verifiable proof that the binary implements some higher-level lan…

> Perhaps we can get to a system that produces not just the binary but also a machine-verifiable proof that the binary implements some higher-level language description of the program.

We don't even have a solution to the halting problem, and it probably can't be solved. "Proof it implements a spec" is pure science fiction.

Hard agree that we'd all be better off muting Elon Musk though.

Post reply on HN