Where I'm at with AI
paulosman.me
Where I'm at with AI
1–10 of 72 posts
Re: Where I'm at with AI
#2> I am certain that generative AI is a productivity amplifier, but its economic, environmental, and cultural externalities are not being discussed enough.
You sure? That’s basically all that’s being discussed.
There’s nothing in this article I haven’t heard 100 times before. Open any mainstream news article or HN/Reddit thread and you’ll find all of OP’s talking points about water, electricity, job loss, the intrinsic value of art, etc.
Re: Where I'm at with AI
#3Its really hard to take people who say this seriously: "If you asked me six months ago what I thought of generative AI, I would have said that we’re seeing a lot of interesting movement, but the jury is out on whether it will be useful"
Like I'm sorry but if you couldn't see that this tech would be enormously useful for millions if not billions of people you really shouldn't be putting yourself out there opining on anything at all. Same vibes as the guys saying horseless carriages were useless and couldn't possibly do anything better than a horse which after all has its own mind. Just incredibly short sighted and lacking curiosity or creativity.
Re: Where I'm at with AI
#4> If you asked me six months ago what I thought of generative AI, I would have said
It’s always this tired argument. “But it’s so much better than six months ago, if you aren’t using it today you are just missing out.”
I’m tired of the hype boss.
Re: Where I'm at with AI
#5> I am certain that generative AI is a productivity amplifier, but its economic, environmental, and cultural externalities are not being discussed enough. You sure? That’s basically all that’s being discussed. There’s nothing in this article I haven’t heard 100 times before. Open any mainstream news article or HN/Reddit thread and you’ll find all of OP’s talking points about water, electricity, job loss, the intrinsi…
It should be reworded as: It's not being discussed amongst the people who matter.
Re: Where I'm at with AI
#6> I am certain that generative AI is a productivity amplifier, but its economic, environmental, and cultural externalities are not being discussed enough. You sure? That’s basically all that’s being discussed. There’s nothing in this article I haven’t heard 100 times before. Open any mainstream news article or HN/Reddit thread and you’ll find all of OP’s talking points about water, electricity, job loss, the intrinsi…
And most of those concerns being wildly dismissed by the AI shills, even here on HN.
Mention anything about the water and electricity wastage and embrace the downvotes.
Re: Where I'm at with AI
#7> If you asked me six months ago what I thought of generative AI, I would have said It’s always this tired argument. “But it’s so much better than six months ago, if you aren’t using it today you are just missing out.” I’m tired of the hype boss.
The second half of that argument was not in this article. The author was just relating his experience.
For what it is worth, I have also gone from a "this looks interesting" to "this is a regular part of my daily workflow" in the same 6 month time period.
Re: Where I'm at with AI
#8> The current landscape is a battle between loss-leaders. OpenAI is burning through billions of dollars per year and is expected to hit tens of billions in losses per year soon. Your $20 per month subscription to ChatGPT is nowhere near keeping them afloat. Anthropic’s figures are more moderate, but it is still currently lighting money on fire in order to compete and gain or protect market share.
I don't doubt that the leading labs are lighting money on fire. Undoubtedly, it costs crazy amounts of cash to train these models. But hardware development takes time and it's only been a few years at this point. Even TODAY, one can run Kimi K2.5, a 1T param open-source model on two mac studios. It runs at 24 tokens/sec. Yes, it'll cost you $20k for the specs needed, but that's hobbyist and small business territory... we're not talking mainframe computer costs here. And certainly this price will come down? And it's hard to imagine that the hardware won't get faster/better?
Yes... training the models can really only be done with NVIDIA and costs insane amounts of money. But it seems like even if we see just moderate improvement going forward, this is still a monumental shift for coding if you compare where we are at to 2022 (or even 2024).
[1] https://x.com/alexocheema/status/2016487974876164562?s=20
Re: Where I'm at with AI
#9Its really hard to take people who say this seriously: "If you asked me six months ago what I thought of generative AI, I would have said that we’re seeing a lot of interesting movement, but the jury is out on whether it will be useful" Like I'm sorry but if you couldn't see that this tech would be enormously useful for millions if not billions of people you really shouldn't be putting yourself out there opining on a…
[dead]
Re: Where I'm at with AI
#10> If you asked me six months ago what I thought of generative AI, I would have said It’s always this tired argument. “But it’s so much better than six months ago, if you aren’t using it today you are just missing out.” I’m tired of the hype boss.
I think the rapid iteration and lack of consistency from the model providers is really killing the hype here. You see HN stories all the time around how things are getting worse, and it seems folks success with the major models is starting to heavily diffuse.
The model providers should really start having LTS (at least 2 years) offerings that deliver consistent results regardless of load, IMO. Folks are tired of the treadmill and just want some stability here, and if the providers aren't going to offer it, llama.cpp will...