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

LLMs reward expertise

seangoedecke.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 605 posts

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#71

Post by Avicebron »

bonoboTP wrote: post #51
neilv wrote: post #44

> In the 2010s, if you had technical gaps (say, you couldn’t write CSS), you had to either rely on a skilled colleague or just hope that the answer to your exact problem was out there on the internet. You could read some general reference/guide/tutorial documentation on CSS, and then probably solve your problem (without searching for "how to center a div", or whatever your exact problem was, and copy&pasting the answ…

I don't think AI use is supposed to replace foundational learning such as reading a C++ book or Python book or CSS tutorial when you're a beginner. You still have to do those things if you want to be a professional or a strong amateur. But many people just want to get the thing done. They don't want to become a mechanic, they just want to drive from A to B.

> They don't want to become a mechanic, they just want to drive from A to B.

I'm fairly certain the article is directed at professionals, or at least the AI companies are basing their valuations off of directly taking a slice of that professional "productivity".

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#72

Post by david-gpu »

bumblehean wrote: post #68
petcat wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You could read some general reference/guide/tutorial documentation on CSS, and then probably solve your problem Hours + Hours of reading and a lot of trial-and-error. The loop was so long and sooo slow. Now it's instant. As if your very first Google search just solved the problem for you immediately.

>Hours + Hours of reading and a lot of trial-and-error. The loop was so long and sooo slow. But that's how you learn...

It is not the only way to learn.

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#73

Post by abixb »

The amplifying mirror analogy works best here. LLMs are ultimately a reflection of your own interactions with its weights, the tone you use, the structure with which you construct your prompt, aspects of an issue you tend to focus on, your breadth of vocabulary and world knowledge and whatnot.

People who (carefully) use it as an extension of their own mind and senses will very likely thrive, and those who use it as a replacement for their minds and their senses will struggle.

One of the Claude skills I made Claude itself generate was the 'learning a concept across tiers' skill -- from ELI5 level to a PhD level, and it triggers whenever I ask it a very general question on a complex topic that isn't my bread-and-butter. The fact that I'm able to choose explanation level from a super smart LLM (that's available 24x7) that can explain any topic under the sun would've been mind-bogglingly sci-fi-ish just 4 years ago in 2022.

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#74

Post by petcat »

bumblehean wrote: post #68
petcat wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You could read some general reference/guide/tutorial documentation on CSS, and then probably solve your problem Hours + Hours of reading and a lot of trial-and-error. The loop was so long and sooo slow. Now it's instant. As if your very first Google search just solved the problem for you immediately.

>Hours + Hours of reading and a lot of trial-and-error. The loop was so long and sooo slow. But that's how you learn...

We don't need to learn CSS anymore. Just like we don't need to learn ASM since GCC does a great job generating it from higher-level code.

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#75

Post by hahahaa »

neilv wrote: post #44

> In the 2010s, if you had technical gaps (say, you couldn’t write CSS), you had to either rely on a skilled colleague or just hope that the answer to your exact problem was out there on the internet. You could read some general reference/guide/tutorial documentation on CSS, and then probably solve your problem (without searching for "how to center a div", or whatever your exact problem was, and copy&pasting the answ…

As they said in the 80s or maybe earlier RTFM. I think if you got a good enough duster TFM was still readable in 2010.

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#76

Post by lucb1e »

kwakubiney wrote: post #69

Might be a very noob question but in this era of LLMs, let me ask the reverse, how do you gain expertise? It seems this rewards people who had expertise pre LLMs, but what about people who don’t have that in a specific domain? What approaches are viable now in this current system?

I'm not sure I understand the question. What would prevent you from doing what these people did now that LLMs are here?

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#77

Post by lionkor »

kwakubiney wrote: post #69

Might be a very noob question but in this era of LLMs, let me ask the reverse, how do you gain expertise? It seems this rewards people who had expertise pre LLMs, but what about people who don’t have that in a specific domain? What approaches are viable now in this current system?

The same as it's been! Make things without using LLMs. Don't debug with them, don't use them to research things, just do it yourself. It'll be painful and that pain is learning.

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#78

Post by kibwen »

petcat wrote: post #74
bumblehean wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Hours + Hours of reading and a lot of trial-and-error. The loop was so long and sooo slow. But that's how you learn...

We don't need to learn CSS anymore. Just like we don't need to learn ASM since GCC does a great job generating it from higher-level code.

I want to believe this is sarcasm, but it's so hard to tell these days.

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#79

Post by bob1029 »

The LLM is like the death star. If you don't know exactly where to point it, you will likely miss your target and have no/negative effect. The further away the target, the more accurate your firing solution needs to be. If all you need to do is add something like a dark mode theme to an existing product, this is probably a point blank shot in this metaphor. Building an entire codebase from zero, or even refactoring a legacy codebase into a new codebase, are lightyears away by comparison. You can still land the shot, but you need to deeply understand the metrology and astrodynamics.

The information system required to encode the aesthetic preferences needed to make a technology experience not suck is likely in excess of what any near-term solution will offer. Knowing when to say "no" is perhaps the most important skill here. You can't just say it arbitrarily either. You really have to mean it and be willing to fight other humans for it.

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#80

Post by petcat »

lionkor wrote: post #70
petcat wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You could read some general reference/guide/tutorial documentation on CSS, and then probably solve your problem Hours + Hours of reading and a lot of trial-and-error. The loop was so long and sooo slow. Now it's instant. As if your very first Google search just solved the problem for you immediately.

This "instant" loop is so fast because it doesn't involve the part where you learn

You seem to be hung up on the part about "learning". Do you know how x86 registers work? Or atomic instructions available on ARM, SPARC, or POWER architectures?

No, of course not. Because all of that got abstracted to higher-level instructions decades ago.

Post reply on HN