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

AI Crap

drewdevault.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 260 posts

Re: AI Crap

#141

Post by slfnflctd »

xixixao wrote: post #18

I have to disagree. Some things will get crappier, and some things will improve. Yes there's hype, but whether it's the same as crypto hype depends on whether there's actually anything useful behind the hype, and unlike crypto, I think it's pretty guaranteed there's something useful here (purely by getting value out of ChatGPT, infinitely more value than I ever got from anything crypto related). > Finding and setting…

Regarding therapists, I absolutely see room for disruption. The majority I've been to were truly terrible, just bad at their jobs in very basic ways, and there aren't enough of them to meet demand. Human presence has value, but it's an open question how much value and whether it offsets things like giving poor advice.

I tried out one of the newer chatbots tailored for this type of interaction a couple weeks ago, and the discussion was better than what I got from probably 80% of the actual human therapists I've encountered as a patient.

Re: AI Crap

#142

Post by read_if_gay_ »

lijok wrote: post #113
read_if_gay_ wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

then I'm sure you also believe the logical consequence that all graphical user interfaces are unethical as well due to frivolously wasted compute. out of interest, how did you make this post? with moral standards as high as yours, you certainly wouldn't run something as wasteful as a full browser, right? especially when hackernews' html is this easy to parse manually. i'd gues you used curl? and as for your hardware?…

Morality is a spectrum, not binary. Yes, all of the things you listed make me and you a less moral person, than say some random dude living in the woods with no access to a computer (all other things being equal).

even the dude living in the woods is still having an impact on the ecosystem, which is defined as negative by this eco-extremist moral framework.

if you take it to the logical conclusion, it just means that all forms of human life are immoral, by nature, and the least immoral human is basically a feral animal, and the most immoral ones are the opposite of that.

so to be moral, just stop being human.

it's just so obviously broken and misguided.

Re: AI Crap

#143

Post by namaria »

jprete wrote: post #29
dools wrote: post #21

> Mediocre programmers will use GitHub Copilot to write trivial code and boilerplate for them (trivial code is tautologically uninteresting), and ML will probably remain useful for writing cover letters for you When I read things like this it makes me think the author hasn't used ChatGPT in their job yet. Here is a really simple example of how I used ChatGPT this afternoon that saved me, I would estimate, about 2 hou…

That sounds like a five-minute job.

"That's a $short_time job" is the signature phrase leaving a trail of unmaintainable, deadline and budget blowing code behind.

Re: AI Crap

#144

Post by HWR_14 »

RecycledEle wrote: post #77
sph wrote: post #4

I am another AI pessimist. Can I please ask the optimists to list the good things LLMs can do for humanity as a whole ? I don't mean banal stuff like Copilot, which is a double-edged sword that might be used against junior developers. I mean world-changing benefits, one step closer to the techno-utopia. Because on paper, the net benefits vs net negatives, for me and other AI pessimists like the author, are not worth…

The good AI can do for humanity is increasing our productivity. It should be the goal of every human to eliminate as many jobs as possible. Every job that is eliminated frees up that person and the people who would have done that job in the future to do other work. Humanity gain the productivity of that other work. If we had not forced painful job losses on people, we would still be 97% subsistence farmers, as we wer…

When was the widespread unemployment in the US due to technological innovations

Re: AI Crap

#145

Post by raincole »

krapp wrote: post #61
raincole wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No? It's exactly how everything worked so far. Live performance (orchestra and operas) were for rich only. Beautiful paintings were for the noble and churches. Porcelain was something needed to be imported from another continent. Tropical fruits were so expensive that people rented them. Now we have the affordable versions of them for everyone in developed countries, and the middle class in developing ones. Yes, ofte…

You're comparing the value of AI versus a human being with the knowledge and skill necessary to earn a medical degree to the value of hearing Mozart live or seeing the Mona Lisa in person to Youtube and JPEGs, as an argument in favor of AI? >but I personally prefer something inferior than nothing. Say that again when your AI physician prescribes you the wrong medication because it hallucinated your medical history.

> You're comparing the value of AI versus a human being with the knowledge and skill necessary to earn a medical degree to the value of hearing Mozart live or seeing the Mona Lisa in person to Youtube and JPEGs, as an argument in favor of AI?

Yes, and I think it's a pretty good analogy.

> Say that again when your AI physician prescribes you the wrong medication because it hallucinated your medical history.

I personally prefer something inferior than nothing. I just said it again.

When your human doctor prescribes the wrong medication, would you reach the conclusion that the world would be better without human doctors?

The fact is simple. Professional diagnosing is such a scarce resource that people buy over-the-counter drugs all the time. It's not AI vs doctors; it's AI vs no doctor.

Re: AI Crap

#146

Post by RufusJacksons »

mort96 wrote: post #107
andai wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>bias towards speaking to a human on the phone Hatred of phone calls aside, I heard an interesting take from Alex Hormozi (paraphrased): "You're on the phone and you say, are you human? No? Oh thank God, because you know the AI has a thousand times more experience than all the humans combined."

Is that supposed to be a serious opinion about contemporary AI..? Because that's crazy to me. Humans can be reasoned with. AI can't. My experience with the likes of ChatGPT tells me that if the AI is wrong about something (which it very very often is), there's no point trying to explain to it that it's wrong or how it's wrong, it will say something like "You are right, sorry for the confusion." and follow up with the…

Having worked in customer service before, the only time customers tried to reason with me was when they were wrong. For at least a large portion of customer service calls, the ability to reason is a negative. Customer calls to say the product is faulty, and with a simple question they admit they didn’t connect the ground wire. They then try to reason with me that they deserve a warranty replacement because their mum just got cancer - fuck reason on cs calls. (Reason might still have a place on complex situations [which yours never is], customer retainment, sales etc)

Even as the top tier tech support for a complex product, 99% of my calls could have been dealt with well by chat gpt in its current form. And my customers would have a more concise outcome, without the variability of my mood, hold times, judgement of their tone etc to effect my advice.

I can’t wait for more ai cs so I can stop talking to a fuckwhit, and talk to an ai that’s almost certainly far more equipped to handle my query.

Re: AI Crap

#147

Post by woeirua »

sharts wrote: post #96

Like social media ruined the world despite it's initial promises, like crypto ended up with grifters of all kinds, AI will follow. Yes, there are some narrow applications that will be GOOD. But will the good outweigh the bad? No, not at all. It never has. We'd all be happier as a society if we went back in time.

I'm only in my mid 30s. I'm _very_ convinced that the world was a better place overall before 2008. Before smartphones, and social media.

Re: AI Crap

#148

Post by FrustratedMonky »

josu wrote: post #112

I told chatGPT to replace reference to AI with references to computers. The arguments seem just as valid (and wrong). Here is a snippet. "Of course, computers do present a threat of violence, but as Randall points out, it’s not from the computers themselves, but rather from the people that employ them. The US military is testing out computer-controlled drones, which aren’t going to be self-aware but will scale up hum…

I think a lot of people might agree with this also.

The reasoning when replacing 'AI' with 'Computers' is the same, and is also Valid.

This doesn't make a good argument against the article, supposing that with 'computers' the article is wrong, so with 'AI' the article would be wrong.

It is actually valid for Computers also, as well as for AI.

Re: AI Crap

#149

Post by dagw »

krapp wrote: post #61
raincole wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No? It's exactly how everything worked so far. Live performance (orchestra and operas) were for rich only. Beautiful paintings were for the noble and churches. Porcelain was something needed to be imported from another continent. Tropical fruits were so expensive that people rented them. Now we have the affordable versions of them for everyone in developed countries, and the middle class in developing ones. Yes, ofte…

You're comparing the value of AI versus a human being with the knowledge and skill necessary to earn a medical degree to the value of hearing Mozart live or seeing the Mona Lisa in person to Youtube and JPEGs, as an argument in favor of AI? >but I personally prefer something inferior than nothing. Say that again when your AI physician prescribes you the wrong medication because it hallucinated your medical history.

AI physician prescribes you the wrong medication because it hallucinated your medical history.

The big question is will that happen more or less often than it does with human doctor? Human doctors 'hallucinate' stuff all the time, due to lack of sleep, lack of time, lack of education and/or just not caring enough to pay proper attention to what they are doing.

Re: AI Crap

#150

Post by animuchan »

andai wrote: post #76
danpalmer wrote: post #7

As with much of this author's content this is a strong opinion that lacks nuance, but I basically agree with the fundamental assertion: that the lasting impact of this AI bubble will be to further centralise power, taking it away from workers. My hope is that a desire for authenticity prevents this from happening – whether that's a strong bias towards human content creators, towards speaking to a human on the phone f…

>bias towards speaking to a human on the phone Hatred of phone calls aside, I heard an interesting take from Alex Hormozi (paraphrased): "You're on the phone and you say, are you human? No? Oh thank God, because you know the AI has a thousand times more experience than all the humans combined."

Maybe in future. Right now it's infuriating and miserable, to the point I will absolutely switch any service provider the moment they subject me to this torture. Old systems with "Press 1 to talk to a person" were bad enough, the AI-based ones are so much worse.
Post reply on HN