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

The future of everything is lies, I guess – Part 5: Annoyances

aphyr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 177 posts

Re: The future of everything is lies, I guess – Part 5: Annoyances

#151

Post by morgengold »

gtowey wrote: post #140
morgengold wrote: post #90

My father just changed his car key battery with the help of ai and he likes that. He also consulted it about about car insurance regulations and he got more out of it than searching the web himself. For most simple mainstream questions I just ask ai instead of googling shitty results. Most of the time ai is good enough and often better than the status ante. People do not care if it is a stupid token prediction machin…

But those are mostly things that were possible before basic web search became nearly unusable. I don't disagree with you at all, I have found that I turn to LLMs to answer questions that I would have just searched with Google before. It feels like a case of companies creating a problem to sell you the solution. The problem in their eyes is that they couldn't squeeze any more money out of search. So they bring us LLMs…

Fair point gtowey. I am with you up to a point. But we have to admit, the new AI way is often faster and needs less brain power. Let's be honest, consumers love that.

Re: The future of everything is lies, I guess – Part 5: Annoyances

#152

Post by intended »

Barbing wrote: post #150
intended wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our society, pre internet, built systems to manage trust. The conditions that allowed those systems to exist (the speed of transmission of data, the ratio of content generation to verification, the ability to shape consensus), have changed. You are ringing the clarion call for community and cooperation, and it will not work. Not because people don’t want community or the better things, but because incentives make the…

Very interesting, I've thought in a completely different direction, towards human verification. "IRL KYC for friends" or something I always hit problems with it though. Let's say I can find someone I trust. Maybe it's me. Say I only enter online spaces, at least with intent of discussion, with those I've met in real life. Well, at some point, someone I've met face to face would be incentivized to maybe share a link t…

Proof of human is the natural first stop.

Your solution shares its essence with a club, a WhatsApp group or interest group.

It works, but you will still be at the mercy of the large communities and economies of thought that the members are a part of.

That is the broader environment you are a part of.

Everyone from FAANG firms, governments to game companies struggle to identify real people from bots.

If your platform is global, then you have to contend with users from different legal regimes and jurisdictions.

The issue is that verification is logistically expensive, ends up infringing on rights, legally complex and on top of all that - error prone.

To top it off - If proof of life ends up gatekeeping any form of value, you will set up incentives to break verification.

Re: The future of everything is lies, I guess – Part 5: Annoyances

#154

Post by Scholmo »

skydhash wrote: post #104
Scholmo wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was a significant jump from whatever we had before to a quality unseen before. As i mentioned, i threw english and german at it. How many people can change the time on their microwave? How many people can ask an LLM through voice or text to change the time of the microwave? A LLM is an interface to a service if you add a MCP Server. Now i can ask Jira things like "hey whats my current task? And what do i need to d…

> A LLM is an interface to a service if you add a MCP Server. Now i can ask Jira things like "hey whats my current task? And what do i need to do?" What about configuring your Jira views, and then bookmark the resulting URL with a nice name like "Jira: Tasks in Progress" or "Jira: Important Tickets". That would be way faster than any LLM prompting. > Its also an interface to documentation. I asked it to help me build…

My hugo example is real. I'm a software engineere for 15 years, have used other templating engines but i struggled with the hugo docs for setting up the initial templating structure.

Nonetheless, I always also see this in the 'with continues progress, this will become extreme good fast' and my estimate is 5-15 years for significant progress with meaningful impact.

Re: The future of everything is lies, I guess – Part 5: Annoyances

#156

Post by sassymuffinz »

throwanem wrote: post #54
sassymuffinz wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Self inflating nipple shaped balloons that generate their own lift without any helium would be an incredible achievement but that doesn't mean it's useful beyond being novel. Chatbots are ultimately just predictive text on steroids, and only complete fools would base their business, or entire economy around it.

The invention you describe, by making possible cargo transport without dependency on either a supply of fuel or the vagaries of weather, would revolutionize the global economy to an extent little short of utopian. You might want to pick a better example the next time you advance this argument, is what I mean to say.

Gemini says it’s a genius idea and I should patent it.

Re: The future of everything is lies, I guess – Part 5: Annoyances

#157

Post by throwanem »

sassymuffinz wrote: post #156
throwanem wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The invention you describe, by making possible cargo transport without dependency on either a supply of fuel or the vagaries of weather, would revolutionize the global economy to an extent little short of utopian. You might want to pick a better example the next time you advance this argument, is what I mean to say.

Gemini says it’s a genius idea and I should patent it.

I can't argue with that!

Re: The future of everything is lies, I guess – Part 5: Annoyances

#158

Post by tim333 »

elzbardico wrote: post #86
gs17 wrote: post #84

> Perhaps we’ll see distributed boycotts where many people deploy personal models to force Burger King’s models to burn through tokens at a fantastic rate. Given how many people hate AI in general, I'm surprised there hasn't been anything like this happening. They could even get around the irony of using "AI" themselves, I bet low-tech language models like Markov chains could provide sufficient time wasting potential…

Most people who hate AI have been completely dis-enfranchised by the system. The media won't amplificate their voices, any viable political leader that is seem as threat will be completely and utterly destroyed by the parties and the PAC machine still on the primaries. It is an incredibly vexing situation to see whatever you're an AI hater or enthusiast. I, for one, welcome our trillion parameters multiple layers ove…

Lots of people seem to hate AI but what is the system supposed to do about it?

Re: The future of everything is lies, I guess – Part 5: Annoyances

#159

Post by tim333 »

kevg123 wrote: post #22

I sent the entire series by Aphyr [1] to some friends. Two of them, independently, responded with a variant of, "TLDR, can you give a summary?" I chat with these friends a lot but I rarely send articles that I suggest they read and that I think are profound, so I expected them to read it. These are smart people that have a history of reading lots of books. They are both huge AI proponents now and use AI for nearly ev…

Smart people usually have competing ways of spending time and may not prioritize an eight part dissertation on AI being a bit annoying?

Re: The future of everything is lies, I guess – Part 5: Annoyances

#160

Post by kevg123 »

tim333 wrote: post #159
kevg123 wrote: post #22

I sent the entire series by Aphyr [1] to some friends. Two of them, independently, responded with a variant of, "TLDR, can you give a summary?" I chat with these friends a lot but I rarely send articles that I suggest they read and that I think are profound, so I expected them to read it. These are smart people that have a history of reading lots of books. They are both huge AI proponents now and use AI for nearly ev…

Smart people usually have competing ways of spending time and may not prioritize an eight part dissertation on AI being a bit annoying?

It's more of a meta point to me. I get that this series isn't landing for some people but the meta-observation is that given something of roughly equal substantiveness as before, these friends' motivations for long form content and discussion seem to have atrophied, perhaps largely due to the addition of the AI summary reality cipher to their lives.
Post reply on HN