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

I am against GenAI and everything it stands for

lpcvoid.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 51 posts

Re: I am against GenAI and everything it stands for

#11

Post by impulser_ »

"If all of this was done to better humanity, AI development would be done in public, data would be legally obtained, models would be released for free, access wouldn't be gatekept behind ever increasing subscription costs."

The vast majority of AI development is public. There are papers literally every single day to read. In fact everything you need to build Claude and GPT models is public. Thanks to Google, DeepSeek, and all the other research labs. There are more research labs than there are closed shops. In fact there really is only one Anthropic, and lately maybe OpenAI. Google still releases papers all the time on AI.

There are more open source models than closed source models and all of them are accessible without a subscription. Yeah you still need to pay for them, but hey as we build out infrastructure and more time is put into efficient models today will easily run on person compute of the future.

Re: I am against GenAI and everything it stands for

#14

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

The thing I don't like about AI doomerism posts is the intellectual dishonesty. We're going to cure cancers we haven't cured before, using AI. We're going to make better diagnoses faster. Adults will be able to accomplish more tasks due to the reduction in the barrier of specialized knowledge and skill. Kids that grow up today will be able to solve their own problems 100x faster and easier than we do today. Companies will be able to triage, diagnose, and fix issues faster and easier than ever before. We will likely spend less money, do less work, and gain more in goods, services, solutions, and health, than ever before.

AI is going to transform people's lives for the better, because every single solitary advancement in human technology in history has had both benefits and drawbacks. If the only thing you can come up with is drawbacks, you're being willfully ignorant.

Re: I am against GenAI and everything it stands for

#15

Post by bigstrat2003 »

moomoo11 wrote: post #3

2005: "Why would I run my workloads in the cloud? I have 400 certifications!"

There is still, to this very day, not a good reason for most businesses to run their workloads in the cloud (startups being a notable exception). So, your argument isn't as compelling as you think.

Re: I am against GenAI and everything it stands for

#16

Post by kelseyfrog »

atleastoptimal wrote: post #9
daishi55 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my opinion by Opus 4.7 Claude was better at coding than most programmers. While there is certainly more slop being produced now overall, I believe the quality of important projects like Linux and proprietary software created by large companies, where advanced AI will be piloted by skilled engineers, will improve in quality, maybe dramatically, over the next decade.

I am still 100% willing to concede that Opus 4.8 or even how good Mythos is supposed to be is not yet at the general reasoning ability of top 5% coders or any smart human with a few years of domain experience. However the rate of improvement is so consistent and unrelenting that it seems silly to assume that it will just stop short of human level. Even if algorithmic, research and data quality improvements suddenly s…

Programming requires thinking and LLMs can't think. Therefore LLMs cannot be better than humans at programming.

Re: I am against GenAI and everything it stands for

#17

Post by llbbdd »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #16
atleastoptimal wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am still 100% willing to concede that Opus 4.8 or even how good Mythos is supposed to be is not yet at the general reasoning ability of top 5% coders or any smart human with a few years of domain experience. However the rate of improvement is so consistent and unrelenting that it seems silly to assume that it will just stop short of human level. Even if algorithmic, research and data quality improvements suddenly s…

Programming requires thinking and LLMs can't think. Therefore LLMs cannot be better than humans at programming.

Programming is just telling a computer what to do. LLMs gave turned out to be pretty good at that. What is thinking, anyway?

Re: I am against GenAI and everything it stands for

#18

Post by meerita »

I have read the article, but at some point, the statement "GenAI: Capitalism in Perfection" did not make sense to me, please don't bash me. I disagree with most of the author's points.

I do not understand what the problem is. There are both closed and open models. You can run your own machine with dozens of open models. You can train your own model. You can do everything on your own.

Of course, there are limitations. For example, you cannot magically have all the best hardware at your disposal, but that limitation also exists in normal programming.

Re: I am against GenAI and everything it stands for

#19

Post by king_zee »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #16
atleastoptimal wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am still 100% willing to concede that Opus 4.8 or even how good Mythos is supposed to be is not yet at the general reasoning ability of top 5% coders or any smart human with a few years of domain experience. However the rate of improvement is so consistent and unrelenting that it seems silly to assume that it will just stop short of human level. Even if algorithmic, research and data quality improvements suddenly s…

Programming requires thinking and LLMs can't think. Therefore LLMs cannot be better than humans at programming.

>Programming requires thinking

The issue about AI is that it's gobbling so much information that at some point you couldn't tell the difference. Programming specifically is something that inherently documents itself, meaning while human communication and context and memes and culture is something that evolves and exists many times outside of textual mediums, as soon as any new piece of code is born it is now part of the AI's dataset. And it doesn't help that a vast majority of our code is pretty damn repetitive, especially if you insert code written in the span of two decades and more into the future.

Tldr : The better we get at coding, the more code we write, the better AI gets at coding.

Re: I am against GenAI and everything it stands for

#20

Post by [deleted] »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #14

The thing I don't like about AI doomerism posts is the intellectual dishonesty. We're going to cure cancers we haven't cured before, using AI. We're going to make better diagnoses faster. Adults will be able to accomplish more tasks due to the reduction in the barrier of specialized knowledge and skill. Kids that grow up today will be able to solve their own problems 100x faster and easier than we do today. Companies…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN