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

I hate AI side projects

dylancastillo.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 129 posts

Re: I hate AI side projects

#101

Post by mysterydip »

hu3 wrote: post #95
perrygeo wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doing things "faster" and "easier" is an interesting way to put it. It places all of the value on one's personal experience of using the AI, and completely ignores the quality of the thing produced. Which explains why most stuff produced by LLMs is throwaway garbage! It only reinforces the parent comment - there is virtually no emphasis on making things "better".

Doing things faster/easier means I now do most of these things whereas I didn't before. Because I have limited time and energy. Take learning as an example: I couldn't afford to spend a weekend learning the tradeoffs made by the top 5 WebGL JavaScript game engines AND generate the same demos for all of them to compare DX, and performance on my phone. And as I had more questions about their implementation I would have…

How did you determine which answers were wrong or half-truths?

Re: I hate AI side projects

#103

Post by [deleted] »

dang wrote: post #64

Edit: for me the most practical insight to come out of these threads, so far, is that Show HNs for generated repos/sites/projects would be more interesting if submitters were required to share the prompts, and not just the generated output. For such projects, the prompts are the real source, while the GH repo or generated artifact is actually the object code, and if that's all that's shared, it's less interesting and…

[deleted]

Re: I hate AI side projects

#104

Post by hu3 »

mysterydip wrote: post #101
hu3 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doing things faster/easier means I now do most of these things whereas I didn't before. Because I have limited time and energy. Take learning as an example: I couldn't afford to spend a weekend learning the tradeoffs made by the top 5 WebGL JavaScript game engines AND generate the same demos for all of them to compare DX, and performance on my phone. And as I had more questions about their implementation I would have…

How did you determine which answers were wrong or half-truths?

By looking at the code?

> And I asked LLM to show me the code for each answer, on all 5 engines.

They same way I would have done without AI, but it sped up finding the relevant parts to a velocity that made it viable in my limited time.

Re: I hate AI side projects

#105

Post by hu3 »

selridge wrote: post #73

[flagged]

Not to mention these people basically self declare as non-hireable or mark themselves a target on their back for the next layoff culling.

Terrible for career.

It's like complaining that power tools are bad because they promote industrialised products over hand made detailed work.

Re: I hate AI side projects

#106

Post by getnormality »

ivanjermakov wrote: post #100
getnormality wrote: post #13

Blog posts by authors claiming AI has transformed them into godlike engines of productivity: 103728369129 Interviews by celebrities predicting AI will revolutionize the economy: 2837191001747 Software and online things I've used that seem to be better than they were before ChatGPT was introduced: 0

> things I've used that seem to be better than they were A bunch of things got obsolete with emergence of good LLMs, especially in research and working with text tasks. See usage graphs of Stackoverflow, Grammarly and others.

"Obsolete" is an incomplete characterization of the state of play.

LLMs put the information from StackOverflow into an arguably more helpful format, but they're still heavily dependent on human input. The LLM must periodically harvest info from human communities to stay up-to-date with technological progress. If those communities die, the LLM will not compensate, and other communities will arise to replace them. Those communities may have different attitudes towards the LLMs that killed their ancestors.

Re: I hate AI side projects

#107

Post by ojr »

elorant wrote: post #57
ojr wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Search has gotten better unless you think AI mode is a downgrade, the alternative of having a wikipedia article, reddit post or random website as the first result is not better technically maybe morally for you but not matter of factually. The average user does less manual filtering.

AI overview though is crap. It almost always gives wrong answers and contradicts things that are in the results.

hasn't been my experience, I am able to search for information faster, speed to correct answer has increased on average, I feel, if we start providing examples your argument starts to fall fast. Think about the average Google Search, you really think it gets it wrong? Your search query is probably more obscure than mainstream web users.

Re: I hate AI side projects

#108

Post by ojr »

nicoburns wrote: post #66
ojr wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Search has gotten better unless you think AI mode is a downgrade, the alternative of having a wikipedia article, reddit post or random website as the first result is not better technically maybe morally for you but not matter of factually. The average user does less manual filtering.

I definitely think the AI mode is a downgrade. It has me seriously considering abandoning Google for different search engine. With a reddit post or a Wikipedia article, it's much easier to assess the credibility of the content. The AI mode does at least attempt to list it's sources, but it's extra hoops to jump through.

For the average Google User, searching for things like who perform in the Superbowl it is not extra hoops and incredibly fast. It's going to power Siri soon, enjoy.

Re: I hate AI side projects

#109

Post by ojr »

misnome wrote: post #96
ojr wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Search has gotten better unless you think AI mode is a downgrade, the alternative of having a wikipedia article, reddit post or random website as the first result is not better technically maybe morally for you but not matter of factually. The average user does less manual filtering.

I’d infinitely prefer a relevant wikipedia article to an AI “Answer” that is almost always wrong. Google lens image search used to be amazing, I tried a repeat of a search I did before of a piece of art, it showed the same piece but confidently listed the artist and year wrong by about 300 years. I’ve had relatives do “research” about things I mentioned I needed to do, and they’ve just sent screenshots of the incorre…

almost always wrong is just incorrect. Ask it who made Hackernews and it says Paul Graham with a informational paragraph it scraped from Wikipedia, without me clicking into Wikipedia. I can provide so many examples.

Re: I hate AI side projects

#110

Post by ojr »

snarf_br wrote: post #41
ojr wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Search has gotten better unless you think AI mode is a downgrade, the alternative of having a wikipedia article, reddit post or random website as the first result is not better technically maybe morally for you but not matter of factually. The average user does less manual filtering.

Factually and environmentally as well.

I guess all the publishers and advertisers are worried and complaining about nothing
Post reply on HN