Live data from Hacker News

Don't fall into the anti-AI hype

antirez.com

111–120 of 1001 posts

Re: Don't fall into the anti-AI hype

#111
post #6

The “anti-AU hype” phrase oversimplifies what’s playing out at the moment. On the tech side, while things are a bit rough around the edges still the tech is very useful and isn’t going away. I honestly don’t see much disagreement there. The concern mostly comes from the business side… that for all the usefulness on the tech there is no clearly viable path that financially supports everything that’s going on. It’s a n…

In the late 2000s i remember that "nobody is willing to pay for things on the Internet" was a common trope. I think it'll culturally take a while before businesses and people understand what they are willing to pay for. For example if you are a large business and you pay xxxxx-xxxxxx per year per developer, but are only willing to pay xxx per year in AI tooling, something's out of proportion.

> For example if you are a large business and you pay xxxxx-xxxxxx per year per developer, but are only willing to pay xxx per year in AI tooling, something's out of proportion.

One is the time of a human (irreplaceable) and the other is a tool for some human to use, seems proportional to me.

Re: Don't fall into the anti-AI hype

#112
post #60
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It took me a few months of working with the agents to get really productive with it. The gains are significant. I write highly detailed specs (equiv multiple A4 pages) in markdown and dicate the agent hierarchy (which agent does what, who reports to who). I've learned a lot of new things this year thanks to AI. It's true that the low levels skills with atrophy. The high level skills will grow though; my learning rate…

This is something I think a lot of people don't seem to notice, or worry about, the moving of programming as a local task, to one that is controlled by big corporations, essentially turning programming into a subscription model, just like everything else, if you don't pay the subscription you will no longer be able to code i.e. PaaS (Programming as a Service). Obviously at the moment most programmers can still code w…

That ignores the possibility that local inference gets good enough to run without a subscription on reasonably priced hardware.

I don't think that's too far away. Anthropic, OpenAI, etc. are pushing the idea that you need a subscription but if opensource tools get good enough they could easily become an expensive irrelivance.

Re: Don't fall into the anti-AI hype

#113
post #78
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By their promises it should get so good that basically you do not need to learn it. So it is reasonable to wait until that point.

this is a straw man, nobody serious is promising that. it is a skill like any other that requires learning

OpenAI is going to get to AGI. And AGI should in minutes build a system that takes vague input and produces fully functioning product out of it. Isn't singularity being promised by them?

Re: Don't fall into the anti-AI hype

#114
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The blog post title is a joke about the AI hype.

Well it completely misses the mark, because your whole article IS hyping up AI, and probably more than anything I've seen before honestly. If it's all meant to be ironical, it's a huge failure and people will use it to support their AI hype.

I was not clear enough. I wanted to write a PRO-AI blog post. The people against AI always say negative things with using as central argument that "AI is hyped and overhyped". So I, for fun, consider the anti-AI movement a form of hype. It's a joke but not in the sense it does not mean what it means.

Re: Don't fall into the anti-AI hype

#115
post #2

> As a programmer, I want to write more open source than ever, now. I want to write less, just knowing that LLM models are going to be trained on my code is making me feel more strongly than ever that my open source contributions will simply be stolen. Am I wrong to feel this? Is anyone else concerned about this? We've already seen some pretty strong evidence of this with Tailwind.

> I want to write less, just knowing that LLM models are going to be trained on my code is making me feel more strongly than ever that my open source contributions will simply be stolen. Am I wrong to feel this? Is anyone else concerned about this? I don't think it's wrong, but misdirected maybe. What do you that someone can "steal" your open source contributions? I've always released most of my code as "open source"…

[A]GPL is viral, so the derived code must use the same license. People that like that license care a lot about that.

On the other side BSD0 is just a polite version of WTFPL, and people that like it doesn't care about what you do with the code.

Re: Don't fall into the anti-AI hype

#116

Don't fall into the "Look ma, no hands" hype. Antirez + LLM + CFO = Billion Dollar Redis company, quite plausibly. /However/ ... As for the delta provided by an LLM to Antirez, outside of Redis (and outside of any problem space he is already intimately familiar with), an Apples to Apples comparison would be he trying this on an equally complex codebase he has no idea about. I'll bet... what Antirez can do with Redis…

Exactly. AI is minimally useful for coding something that you couldn't have been able to code yourself, given enough time, without explicitly investing time in generic learning not specific to that codebase or particular task.

Although calling AI "just autocomplete" is almost a slur now, it really is just that in the sense that you need to A) have a decent mental picture of what you want, and, B) recognize a correct output when you see it.

On a tangent, the inability to identify correct output is also why I don't recommend using LLMs to teach you anything serious. When we use a search engine to learn something, we know when we've stumbled upon a really good piece of pedagogy through various signals like information density, logical consistency, structuredness/clarity of thought, consensus, reviews, author's credentials etc. But with LLMs we lose these critical analysis signals.

Re: Don't fall into the anti-AI hype

#117

What I don't understand about this whole "get on board the AI train or get left behind" narrative, what advantage does an early adopter have for AI tools? The way I see it, I can just start using AI once they get good enough for my type of work. Until then I'm continuing to learn instead of letting my brain atrophy.

The idea, I think, is to gain experience with the loop of communicating ideas in natural language rather than code, and then reading the generated code and taking it as feedback.

It's not that different overall, I suppose, from the loop of thinking of an idea and then implementing it and running tests; but potentially very disorienting for some.

Re: Don't fall into the anti-AI hype

#119

> But what was the fire inside you, when you coded till night to see your project working? It was building. I feel like this is not the same for everyone. For some people, the "fire" is literally about "I control a computer", for others "I'm solving a problem for others", and yet for others "I made something that made others smile/cry/feel emotions" and so on. I think there is a section of programmer who actually do…

> I think there is a section of programmer who actually do like the actual typing of letters, numbers and special characters into a computer, and for them, I understand LLMs remove the fun part.

Exactly me.

Re: Don't fall into the anti-AI hype

#120

> But what was the fire inside you, when you coded till night to see your project working? It was building. I feel like this is not the same for everyone. For some people, the "fire" is literally about "I control a computer", for others "I'm solving a problem for others", and yet for others "I made something that made others smile/cry/feel emotions" and so on. I think there is a section of programmer who actually do…

> programmer who actually do like the actual typing

It's not about the typing, it's about the understanding.

LLM coding is like reading a math textbook without trying to solve any of the problems. You get an overview, you get a sense of what it's about and most importantly you get a false sense of understanding.

But if you try to actually solve the problems, you engage completely different parts of your brain. It's about the self-improvement.

Post reply on HN