271–280 of 759 posts
I get it’s a joke, and often a frequent cynical joke made here, but I actually think it’s a good thought experiment. Almost like a new Turing test The thought experiment, to be clear, is building an artificially intelligent CEO or company founder with the intent of generating profit. If this AI can turn a profit, it has passed this new test Of course, by the time this new AI starts turning a profit, it will be maximi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean on the one hand it is annoying because everybody has speech patterns, I like to say "I mean" and "on the one hand" a lot. On the other hand it seems a sort of self-protective recoil, nobody wants to spend a lot of time talking to an AI. Our jobs and society already make us spend way too much time and effort doing that! On the other hand: so, people throw the baby out with the bathwater, which is a problem, but…
Your comment has three hands, that's the kind of collaborative communication style we should all aspire to. Personally, I suspect good writers will adapt in due time, not because they don't want to sound like AI, but because they don't want to sound cliche. Even the ones stubbornly holding on to their em-dashes. The ones hit hardest will be the mediocre writers, who have always relied on cliches. Their writing will b…
Also sometimes known as 'The Gripping Hand'
A serious point about this is that it's an AI that's an organization. This matters. People laughed at Gas Town, and at that "Fences, not Sandboxes" article yesterday.[1] They're both AIs set up as an organization, not an emulated human. They're both expensive to operate, because the AI members of the organization spend a lot of time talking with each other. They're both applied to frivolous problems. Now we have the…
A related point that I've been making privately for at least ten years to anyone that would listen, is that we've had Superhuman Intelligence for at least hundreds, if not thousands, of years in the form of corporations and institutions. No single human could design a rocket to go to the moon or keep all Wallmart stores supplied on a daily basis. Moreover when something like the CEO or US president changes, the polic…
A serious point about this is that it's an AI that's an organization. This matters. People laughed at Gas Town, and at that "Fences, not Sandboxes" article yesterday.[1] They're both AIs set up as an organization, not an emulated human. They're both expensive to operate, because the AI members of the organization spend a lot of time talking with each other. They're both applied to frivolous problems. Now we have the…
> An is XYZ. This matters. You're probably totally innocent, but this comes across as being AI-written, especially in the context of an AI problem and when your response is pro-AI. For the next 3-12 months (maybe more, we'll see), I suspect you'll have a lot more success if you shy away from those speech patterns.
I wrote that because the last two times AIs built like organizations came up on HN, they were dismissed. Hence the somewhat out of character rhetoric.
We have organizations of people for the usual reasons. Scale. Specialization. Robustness against failure and errors. All those wins apply to structured groups of LLMs. So this has a reasonable chance of being useful. It's expensive at the moment, but probably cheaper than the management team it may replace.
For some reason, this idea seems to upset people. Unclear why. Comments?
Based on my observations, the most important characteristics of a CEO is to be over 6ft, and to walk about looking important. CEO jobs are safe until the humanoid robots have mastered this skill.
I'm 6'5 and a jobless software dev. If anyone has a CEO role going spare, let me know, I'll have a crack at it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s also a subtly reworded, “This isn’t human-level AI—it’s corporate-level AI.”
Sigh. I want my damn em dash back. I had the Mac key combo memorized back when the phrase "AI winter" was coined . Now everyone thinks it's AI slop.
Unfortunately you can't get your em dash back, ever. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funny that we're reached the point where perfectly normal rhetorical habits can trigger the "AI wrote this" alarm... (or not funny, just ironic)
No. People don't speak like drunk linguinist on anonymous online forum. That's not "Perfectly normal rhetorical habits". It's either AI-assisted or someone desperatelly trying to impress "unknown people" with their non-existent intellect.
At this point it's super annoying for me to have my "AI wrote this" alarm trigger at my own language, as I'm writing...
> The next session opens with a block so the Executive remembers what it recommended last month. This is morbidly unrealistic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, that is a good manager, but in my experience, it is better if the culture of the team is about ensuring everyone has opportunities to grow, build on their strengths, and connect with opportunities. When that is considered the manager’s job, and not the job of every member of the team, people get neglected, and many strengths and opportunities go to waste.
Best managers make this the core culture in the team.