Live data from Hacker News

Paul Graham calls A.I. ‘the exact opposite of a solution in search of a problem’

fortune.com

21–30 of 48 posts

Re: Paul Graham calls A.I. ‘the exact opposite of a solution in search of a problem’

#21
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't found it to be more than very marginally useful in my life. It's interesting that some people think it's incredibly useful and others find it not worth the bother. I wonder what the difference is?

Some people have significantly more need for generating vacuous, meaningless textual content from very little initial seed content.

[flagged]

Re: Paul Graham calls A.I. ‘the exact opposite of a solution in search of a problem’

#22
post #6

It feels like we are well on our way toward the Trough of Disillusionment in the Gartner hype cycle for ChatGPT. It’s losing users daily. People are saying that it’s gotten worse since launch (don’t know if this is true but it’s what I’m hearing). As far as I know, it hasn’t revolutionized anything except spam generation.

Hype or not, I'm absolutely keeping my ChatGPT subscripion because it has proven to be consistently useful in my everyday life.

[dead]

Re: Paul Graham calls A.I. ‘the exact opposite of a solution in search of a problem’

#23
post #15
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you actually use it you know it's incredibly useful for learning, getting answers to general problems that 99% of the time work fine and helps you understand its answers. The amount of times it's wrong or misleading is not significant enough to even be annoying during day to day use. Just talking about current practical usefulness here not even speculating about the future, just want it's useful for today. We us…

I see that an an incredibly high bar. Even with all the resources of Google they (and everyone else) are losing the SEO war. These algos at their core fundamentally can't handle adversarial input and we've been making faster horses since AltaVista. Even if the only thing LLms are useful for is search that's still great.

> Even with all the resources of Google they (and everyone else) are losing the SEO war.

Google is choosing to lose the SEO war because they think it would impact their ad revenue.

Every site that takes longer than 100ms to load? Gone. Wipes out vast quantities of ad-infested sewage. Login required? Gone. Websites now have to choose between reach and subscribers and the ones that choose subscribers will have to get better. Javascript required to access content? Gone. No more ad bidding system at all and no vectors for spreading virii. Tracking stuff from Facebook/Instagram/TikTok/etc.? Gone. No more analytics tracking everybody.

We don't need AI to fix this. We need an alternative search engine. If "AI" is what gets us there, I'll take it. But it ain't "AI".

Re: Paul Graham calls A.I. ‘the exact opposite of a solution in search of a problem’

#24
post #8

Marketers gonna market. Anybody remember all the "big data" hype? ChatGPT and its ilk don't enable me to do something today that I couldn't do yesterday. Nor do they enable me to do something an order of magnitude faster than I could do yesterday. Contrast this to when microprocessors hit. Suddenly, things like industrial control went from the size of multiple refrigerators to a PC board. When the price dropped (thin…

Give it some time. How long was it from the day iPhone was introduced until Uber?

Re: Paul Graham calls A.I. ‘the exact opposite of a solution in search of a problem’

#26
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hype or not, I'm absolutely keeping my ChatGPT subscripion because it has proven to be consistently useful in my everyday life.

I haven't found it to be more than very marginally useful in my life. It's interesting that some people think it's incredibly useful and others find it not worth the bother. I wonder what the difference is?

I use it for tons of things personally.

1. Data reformatting, data parsing, anything that requires transforming data in anyway. E.g. give me all blah in this massive raw content of whatever. Give this data as json, this as csv.

2. Writing small scripts to do various other data related actions, automations.

3. Summaries. Extracting key points. Asking questions about content I don't understand well. Asking clarification questions.

4. Bulletpoints, outlines, asking for feedback for my own content, what could I be missing, brainstorming.

5. Coding obviously, but with Copilot mainly rather than ChatGPT specifically.

6. Asking it to review/criticise whatever work or output I do.

7. Anything learning/research related, I use it avidly. If I want to learn about any subject. I haven't found hallucinations to be an issue at all, because I view the content with grain of salt in the first place and I double check if I think something is out of place, but it's really, really good for learning, because I can actively question it compared to a course or whatever, and me being able to debate with it is amazing for learning. And compared to a person I never have to feel that my question may be stupid, I can just spew to it whatever immediately comes to mind and get clarifications. If I had a person as a mentor, I might be more careful, but this removes the aspect of social anxiety completely. I can keep asking clarifying questions infinitely.

8. Decisions. Trying to understand pros and cons of various decisions. Allowing it to brainstorm those pros and cons. I combine with my own pros and cons of course.

To me it's like this dream thing you can bounce your thoughts back and forth with, without having to worry about judgment etc.

Re: Paul Graham calls A.I. ‘the exact opposite of a solution in search of a problem’

#27
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hype or not, I'm absolutely keeping my ChatGPT subscripion because it has proven to be consistently useful in my everyday life.

I haven't found it to be more than very marginally useful in my life. It's interesting that some people think it's incredibly useful and others find it not worth the bother. I wonder what the difference is?

Imagination? Or more seriously perhaps a higher tolerance for not 100% accurate output?

Re: Paul Graham calls A.I. ‘the exact opposite of a solution in search of a problem’

#30
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't found it to be more than very marginally useful in my life. It's interesting that some people think it's incredibly useful and others find it not worth the bother. I wonder what the difference is?

Imagination? Or more seriously perhaps a higher tolerance for not 100% accurate output?

I don't expect or demand 100% accuracy. As to imagination... perhaps. I'm not sitting around trying to think up things to have it do. I've just tried using it to speed up rote stuff, but I find it's faster and easier just to do it myself to begin with.
Post reply on HN