141–150 of 228 posts
Cause they are able to search the web deeply, search for up to date info/research and synergize all that. You can have back and fourth for as long as you need.
The issue is that using LLMs properly requires a certain skill that more people lack.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And perhaps both are overestimating the mean person's ability to detect a hallucinated solution vs a genuine one.
I think hallucination is grossly overstated as a problem at this point, most models will actively search the web and reason about the results. You're much more likely to get the incorrect solution browsing stack overflow than you are asking AI.
> We will quickly lose even the social permission to take something like energy [...] A way to drum up sense of urgency without mentioning that it's the patience of the investors (and _not_ the public) that will be the limiting factor here?
Similar to my thoughts. If we are still scrambling to find stuff the average Joe finds useful, the 100s of Billions poured into this gold rush are wasted (IMHO).
It's not even a solution in search of a problem, it's a tool in search of a reason to use it as a solution to a problem on such a scale that it justifies the billions of dollars of money we've poured into it while driving up the cost of fresh water, electricity, RAM, storage, data centre space, and so on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’ve used Claude code to debug and sometimes it’ll say it knows what the issue is, then when I make it cite a source for its assertions, it will do a web search and sometimes spit out a link whose contents contradict its own claim. One time I tried to use Gemini to figure out 1950s construction techniques so I could understand how my house was built. It made a dubious sounding claim about the foundation, so I had it…
> maybe they don’t fully fabricate links Grok certainly will (at least as of a couple months ago). And they weren't just stale links either.
As for me, ChatGPT and Claude were able to diagnose and fix health issues that multiple doctors failed to fix. I trust LLMs more than random doctors and blogs. Cause they are able to search the web deeply, search for up to date info/research and synergize all that. You can have back and fourth for as long as you need. The issue is that using LLMs properly requires a certain skill that more people lack.
Evangelists keep insisting that healthcare is one of the things that AI will revolutionize in the coming years, but I just don't get it. To me it's not even clear what they mean by "AI" in this context (and I'm not convinced it's clear to them either). If they mean "machine learning", then sure there are application in cancer detection and the like, but development there has been moving at a steady pace for decades a…
At best and if you're lucky to have a receptive doctor you can use it to nudge them in the right direction. But until direct to consumer sales for medical equipment and tests are allowed, the medical profession is well insulated. It is impossible by regulation to "take healthcare into your own hands" even if you want to.
LLMs and their capabilities are very impressive and definitely useful. The productivity gains often seem to be smaller than intuitively expected though. For example, using ChatGPT to get a response to a random question like "How do I do XYZ" is much more convenient than googling it, but the time savings are often not that relevant for your overall productivity. Before LLMs you were usually already able to find the in…
I use ChatGPT “thinking” mode as a way to run multiple searches and summarize the results. It takes some time, but I can do other stuff in another tab and come back. It’s for queries that are unlikely to be satisfied in a single search. I don’t think it would be a negligible amount of time if you did it yourself.
On the other hand, where I think llms are going to excel, is you roll the dice, trust the output, and don't validate it. If it works out yayy you're ahead of everyone else that did bother to validate it.
I think this is how vibe coded apps are going to go. If the app blows up, shut down the company and start a new one.
LLMs and their capabilities are very impressive and definitely useful. The productivity gains often seem to be smaller than intuitively expected though. For example, using ChatGPT to get a response to a random question like "How do I do XYZ" is much more convenient than googling it, but the time savings are often not that relevant for your overall productivity. Before LLMs you were usually already able to find the in…
This is partly because Google is past the enshittification hump and ChatGPT is just starting to climb up it - they just announced ads.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And the people who bought a lot of shovels during the gold rush thought they were making the smartest money move
Dude, I'm getting a shovel factory for practically nothing. I'm easily realizing 5x value on that investment. I'd say for an estate that I am the executor of, it probably saved me $50k in legal fees and other expenses because it helped me analyze a novel problem and organize it ask the right questions of counsel. Another scenario i had to deal with i needed a mobile app to do something very specific for a few weeks.…
As for me, ChatGPT and Claude were able to diagnose and fix health issues that multiple doctors failed to fix. I trust LLMs more than random doctors and blogs. Cause they are able to search the web deeply, search for up to date info/research and synergize all that. You can have back and fourth for as long as you need. The issue is that using LLMs properly requires a certain skill that more people lack.