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

Google’s ATLAS is a look at how people are using AI

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 158 posts

Re: Google’s ATLAS is a look at how people are using AI

#141

Post by tokioyoyo »

watwut wrote: post #103
tokioyoyo wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did say explicitly that I think, Google did not cherry pick any data. My main question is “are they trying to build a narrative, because of the growing anti-AI tendency of the general population?”. It feels like every big co is giving up on big questions (e.g. what happens when AI replaces more and more jobs? what happens to education system?) because searching for an answer to those questions was upsetting a lot o…

> It feels like every big co is giving up on big questions (e.g. what happens when AI replaces more and more jobs? what happens to education system?) because searching for an answer to those questions was upsetting a lot of people. They were not searching for the answers. They were trying to get more investment money on the promises to investors about education and jobs displacement. Those are two different things.

I genuinely believe in the early days they were looking for the problems. At least the people I know personally did so. Openly and loudly as well. Some people genuinely like to solve problems!

But again, now it’s more of a “aight too much money on the table so maybe not real”.

Re: Google’s ATLAS is a look at how people are using AI

#142

Post by robocat »

grey-area wrote: post #125
rickydroll wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like the term "slop", misuse of a pop psychology term like "AI psychosis" is another block to critical thinking and a casual dismissal of a conversation. You're right, LLM-generated answers are not the same as those from a qualified expert. Sometimes they're better. Case in point. I recently had a discussion with a friend of mine about going off propranolol. He wanted to stop it because he didn't like the side effect…

Great example, but not for the reasons you think. You have zero qualifications to make that judgement call. You don’t know if the standard protocol was right in this instance or inappropriate (depends on dose side effects etc etc) and I certainly wouldn’t go anywhere near Gemini to try to verify that. Please stop relying on word generators for medical advice, period.

> Please stop relying on word generators for medical advice

Ironic that you are giving medical advice.

You might as well say don't read books.

Re: Google’s ATLAS is a look at how people are using AI

#143

Post by robocat »

throwaw12 wrote: post #140
rickydroll wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no chance I would trust a human to correctly tell me which wire was the high-voltage one, nor would I trust the documentation. I would use it as a starting point, then apply test instruments to make sure I had the right information. Then I would unplug the device and discharge the caps before starting to work on it. We need to start training people that AI answers are just as fallible as answers you get from…

> We need to start training people that AI answers are just as fallible as answers you get from a human You're right, BUT, humans don't risk to take responsibility if they clearly don't know the answer, they would at least tell you: I don't know, let me find someone who might know or X, Y, Z might be able to help you. AI: Bro, trust me, this is 100% accurate, I give you my teeth if you find it wrong. ... later on ...…

> BUT, humans don't risk to take responsibility if they clearly don't know the answer

Where do you live?

People say the craziest shit about topics they are completely ignorant of. Even important things like medical advice, and not just internet pundits or crappy journalists.

Even people that care for you (friends or family) can give terrible advice. Saw it yesterday with one friend advising another on a legal matter that I thought obviously demanded a lawyer and a strategy. Another suggested some bad job seeking advice.

Personal advice is the worst, and highly important.

There's an art to finding good experts. And an art to filtering what anyone says.

Re: Google’s ATLAS is a look at how people are using AI

#144

Post by grey-area »

robocat wrote: post #142
grey-area wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great example, but not for the reasons you think. You have zero qualifications to make that judgement call. You don’t know if the standard protocol was right in this instance or inappropriate (depends on dose side effects etc etc) and I certainly wouldn’t go anywhere near Gemini to try to verify that. Please stop relying on word generators for medical advice, period.

> Please stop relying on word generators for medical advice Ironic that you are giving medical advice. You might as well say don't read books.

This is not medical advice, it’s advice on living - in most cases, trust that experts in a subject know more than you and have more context than you.

Re: Google’s ATLAS is a look at how people are using AI

#145

Post by hollerith »

unknownfuture wrote: post #118
rayiner wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Catching one trend, like Mark Zuckerberg, is just luck. But there’s clearly CEOs who are able to predict the direction of markets over a sustained period of time across multiple inflection points. E.g. Bill Gates and Steve Jobs.

Eh, even if we take those mythologized examples as real (I'd argue the history of both is heavily whitewashed and their failues, like NeXT or Windows Phone to name just two, are papered over in their mythmaking), if anything they're the exceptions that prove the rule.

Apple tried to create a new OS and failed (during Jobs's absence from Apple), bought NeXT, then used NeXT's work as the basis for the very successful OS X. And despite this, in your mind NeXT is a failure?

Re: Google’s ATLAS is a look at how people are using AI

#146

Post by unknownfuture »

hollerith wrote: post #145
unknownfuture wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, even if we take those mythologized examples as real (I'd argue the history of both is heavily whitewashed and their failues, like NeXT or Windows Phone to name just two, are papered over in their mythmaking), if anything they're the exceptions that prove the rule.

Apple tried to create a new OS and failed (during Jobs's absence from Apple), bought NeXT, then used NeXT's work as the basis for the very successful OS X. And despite this, in your mind NeXT is a failure?

NeXT itself, as a company, was absolutely a failure. That Apple came along and bought them and stripped them for parts is certainly convenient for Jobs, but doesn't change that, had they continued on their own, it would've ended up in the dustbin of history.

TBH I'm surprised you're arguing. NeXT is generally accepted as a commercial failure. Hell the NeXT cube, alone, was a famously collosal flop. This isn't even a little bit controversial.

Re: Google’s ATLAS is a look at how people are using AI

#147

Post by archagon »

TacticalCoder wrote: post #66
cube00 wrote: post #31

For example, automotive technicians and industrial mechanics use AI to interpret complex test results, debug electrical wiring, and inspect machinery for wear. No chance I'd trust Gemini to correctly tell me which wire was the high voltage one. You're absolutely right! I apologize for providing a factually incorrect explanation. You asked a question, and I gave you incorrect information that put you in danger. That f…

> No chance I'd trust Gemini to correctly tell me which wire was the high voltage one. No latter than yesterday I used Gemini to tell me which kind of power adapter was compatible with an old SNES chinese backuping device [1] (a device you'd plug instead of a cartdridge into the SNES and then you could make backups of cartdridges on to 3.5 floppy disks. You could then run the games from those backups. Conveniently yo…

OK… but… how did it “know”?

If there’s no way to verify the data (e.g. look at the photo of the power brick it unearthed somewhere) then there’s a good chance it just synthesized an answer.

Re: Google’s ATLAS is a look at how people are using AI

#148

Post by hollerith »

unknownfuture wrote: post #146
hollerith wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple tried to create a new OS and failed (during Jobs's absence from Apple), bought NeXT, then used NeXT's work as the basis for the very successful OS X. And despite this, in your mind NeXT is a failure?

NeXT itself, as a company, was absolutely a failure. That Apple came along and bought them and stripped them for parts is certainly convenient for Jobs, but doesn't change that, had they continued on their own, it would've ended up in the dustbin of history. TBH I'm surprised you're arguing. NeXT is generally accepted as a commercial failure. Hell the NeXT cube, alone, was a famously collosal flop. This isn't even a…

I don't see any mention of shareholder value or financial performance upstream (unless we count your latest comment). I do see, "their managers are not capable of leading innovation," and, "I don't see a reason to believe any CEO, past or present, has had the ability to accurately predict the future".

Jobs cared more about changing the world and advancing civilization than he cared about providing good value for investors. NeXT was a very solid success when measured by the yardstick of what Jobs set out to do.

Trying to make money by creating a new general-purpose operating system is inherently a very risky enterprise. NeXT's investors knew that.

Re: Google’s ATLAS is a look at how people are using AI

#149

Post by [deleted] »

hollerith wrote: post #148
unknownfuture wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NeXT itself, as a company, was absolutely a failure. That Apple came along and bought them and stripped them for parts is certainly convenient for Jobs, but doesn't change that, had they continued on their own, it would've ended up in the dustbin of history. TBH I'm surprised you're arguing. NeXT is generally accepted as a commercial failure. Hell the NeXT cube, alone, was a famously collosal flop. This isn't even a…

I don't see any mention of shareholder value or financial performance upstream (unless we count your latest comment). I do see, "their managers are not capable of leading innovation," and, "I don't see a reason to believe any CEO, past or present, has had the ability to accurately predict the future". Jobs cared more about changing the world and advancing civilization than he cared about providing good value for inve…

[deleted]

Re: Google’s ATLAS is a look at how people are using AI

#150

Post by engineer_22 »

grey-area wrote: post #100
rickydroll wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no chance I would trust a human to correctly tell me which wire was the high-voltage one, nor would I trust the documentation. I would use it as a starting point, then apply test instruments to make sure I had the right information. Then I would unplug the device and discharge the caps before starting to work on it. We need to start training people that AI answers are just as fallible as answers you get from…

AI psychosis. No, LLM generated answers are not the same as those from a qualified expert. Of course you should trust a human if that is their job and you should never trust a word generator to give you accurate answers to an important question.

In safety critical jobs nobody is trusted, everything is verified. And there is someone checking the checker.
Post reply on HN