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

AI is stifling new tech adoption?

vale.rocks

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 442 posts

Re: AI is stifling new tech adoption?

#151

Post by diggan »

spenvo wrote: post #135

Like several other commenters in this thread, I also wrote[0] something recently on a related topic: Google's AI Overviews and ChatGPT harm the discovery of long tail information - from a product builder's perspective. Basically, users are having a tougher time finding accurate info about your product ( even if the correct answer to their query is in Google's own search results ). And I also found the basic tier of C…

> And I also found the basic tier of ChatGPT hallucinated my app's purpose in a way that was borderline slanderous.

I'm curious about this, what exactly did ChatGPT write and how was it borderline slanderous? Sounds like a big danger.

Re: AI is stifling new tech adoption?

#152

Post by shermantanktop »

kaonwarb wrote: post #62
killjoywashere wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not if they're trained to work through the problem each time they encounter it and stay up with their clinical training. The day the new classification drops many have already heard about it. You also assume that all the models in use will in fact be retrained. Generally, this position flies in the face of lived experience. AI is in fact stifling adoption of new things across many industries.

My position is informed by my own experience; I am not a physician, but have worked closely with a large number of them in a healthcare-oriented career. I've repeatedly noted long-term resistance of many physicians to updating their priors based on robust new evidence. There are definitely many physicians who do take in the latest developments judiciously. But I find the long tail of default resistance to be very, ve…

I was just explaining to a UK colleague about how the American health care system makes getting treatment (and getting it paid for) into a DIY project. And so as a medical shopper, if I’m getting a very standard established treatment I might go for the older experienced doctor, but if it’s a new thing I’d opt for someone more recently graduated.

I’m sure the same thing applies worldwide.

Re: AI is stifling new tech adoption?

#153

Post by wrs »

Secretmapper wrote: post #126
lackoftactics wrote: post #83

> OpenAI’s latest models have cutoffs of late 2023. The first paragraph is factually incorrect; the cutoff is June 2024 for 4o. Awww, no more new JavaScript frameworks and waiting only for established technologies to cut through the noise. I don't see that as a bad thing. Technologies need to mature, and maintaining API backward compatibility is another advantage.

> Awww, no more new JavaScript frameworks and waiting only for established technologies to cut through the noise. I don't see that as a bad thing. Technologies need to mature, and maintaining API backward compatibility is another advantage. I think this kind of discussion is immature and downplays the point of the article. A good example of this that I just encountered: Rust. Just asked Claude/ChatGPT for rust stuff…

Same here. In my TypeScript code, Cursor/Claude seem quite fluent. In my Rust code, I often turn Cursor Tab off because it’s just suggesting nonsense.

Re: AI is stifling new tech adoption?

#154

Post by gordonhart »

stuffoverflow wrote: post #50
spiderfarmer wrote: post #18

>With Claude 3.5 Sonnet, which is generally my AI offering of choice given its superior coding ability, my “What personal preferences should Claude consider in responses?” profile setting includes the line “When writing code, use vanilla HTML/CSS/JS unless otherwise noted by me”. Despite this, Claude will frequently opt to generate new code with React, and in some occurrences even rewrite my existing code into React…

Since the system prompt tied to the artifacts feature seems to be the reason for it having a preference for react, seems like the solution would be to use the API instead. Plenty of front ends available nowadays that let you use your own API key. I've been using typingmind since I paid for it over a year ago but I'd be interested to know if some good open source alternatives have popped up more recently.

The main blocker to using the API with an alternative frontend is the cost.

Daily API usage can easily go above the $20/month subscription cost since output tokens are expensive and each new message reuses the whole message chain as input tokens. Especially true if you often upload images or documents.

Re: AI is stifling new tech adoption?

#155

Post by stevemadere »

This is truly terrible.

What happened to a new JS front end library every week?

If this keeps up, we won't get to completely throw away all of our old code and retool every two years (the way we've been operating for the last 20 years)

How will we ever spend 85% of our time spinning up on new js front end libraries?

And don't even get me started on the back end.

If AI had been around in 2010, we probably still have some people writing apps in Rails.

OMG what a disaster that would be.

It's a good thing we just completely threw away all of the work that went into all of those gems. If people had continued using them, we wouldn't have had the chance to completely rewrite all of them in node and python from scratch.

Re: AI is stifling new tech adoption?

#156

Post by lrae »

photochemsyn wrote: post #87

The central issue is high cost of training the models, it seems: > "Once it has finally released, it usually remains stagnant in terms of having its knowledge updated. This creates an AI knowledge gap. A period between the present and AI’s training cutoff... The cutoff means that models are strictly limited in knowledge up to a certain point. For instance, Anthropic’s latest models have a cutoff of April 2024, and Op…

> Hasn't DeepSeek's novel training methodology changed all that? If the energy and financial cost for training a model really has drastically dropped, then frequent retraining including new data should become the norm.

Even if training gets way cheaper or even if it stays as expensive but more money gets thrown at it, you'll still run into the issue of having no/less data to train on?

Re: AI is stifling new tech adoption?

#157

Post by 52-6F-62 »

resource_waste wrote: post #149
Schiendelman wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The healthcare diagnosis one may be wrong. For existing known diagnoses, (or at least the sliver of diagnoses in this one study), AI can beat doctors - and doctors don't like listening when it challenges them, so it will disrupt them badly as people learn they can provide data from tests directly to AI agents. Sure, this doesn't replace new diagnoses, but the vaaaast majority of failures to diagnose are for existing…

It has been interesting to see the excuses from doctors, why we need error prone humans instead of higher quality robots. >Empathy (lol... from doctors?) >New undetectable cases (lol... AI doesnt have to wait 1 year for an optional continuing education class. I had doctors a few years ago recommending a dangerous expensive surgery over a safer cheaper laser procedure) >corruptible (lmaooo) We humans are empathetic to…

So… we put all of our trust (wait, at that point it might be called faith) into this machine…

If it ever turns on us, begins to malfunction in unforeseen ways, or goes away completely—then what?

Shortsighted, all of it.

Re: AI is stifling new tech adoption?

#158

Post by spenvo »

diggan wrote: post #151
spenvo wrote: post #135

Like several other commenters in this thread, I also wrote[0] something recently on a related topic: Google's AI Overviews and ChatGPT harm the discovery of long tail information - from a product builder's perspective. Basically, users are having a tougher time finding accurate info about your product ( even if the correct answer to their query is in Google's own search results ). And I also found the basic tier of C…

> And I also found the basic tier of ChatGPT hallucinated my app's purpose in a way that was borderline slanderous. I'm curious about this, what exactly did ChatGPT write and how was it borderline slanderous? Sounds like a big danger.

So ChatGPT seemingly guessed its purpose just from its name. Its name is CurrentKey Stats, and it inaccurately described it as an app that kept stats on the current keyboard keys you were pressing, so essentially a key logger, which is again completely wrong. I was actually somewhat hesitant to make this comment out of the fear that the next AI models will train on it and reinforce the false idea that that's what my app is. Sad times

Re: AI is stifling new tech adoption?

#159

Post by throwbmw »

kaonwarb wrote: post #62
killjoywashere wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not if they're trained to work through the problem each time they encounter it and stay up with their clinical training. The day the new classification drops many have already heard about it. You also assume that all the models in use will in fact be retrained. Generally, this position flies in the face of lived experience. AI is in fact stifling adoption of new things across many industries.

My position is informed by my own experience; I am not a physician, but have worked closely with a large number of them in a healthcare-oriented career. I've repeatedly noted long-term resistance of many physicians to updating their priors based on robust new evidence. There are definitely many physicians who do take in the latest developments judiciously. But I find the long tail of default resistance to be very, ve…

It's not bad actually, considering how many times the new shiny thing has turned out to be quite dangerous a few years later. In a field as high stake as healthcare you want the whole spectrum, from early adopters to die hard skeptics. Especially since we know the reproducibility problem of research, the influence of big pharma and big insurance on healthcare, etc etc
Post reply on HN