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

Bored of It

paulrobertlloyd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 507 posts

Re: Bored of It

#211

Post by fazeirony »

zwnow wrote: post #78
InsideOutSanta wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you go from "successful" to "useful"? There seems to be no logical connection from "shitty people are successful" to "empathy is not useful to society."

Because empathy isn't useful to society. One only lives once so you better make sure you'll be successful. Having empathy will actively hurt your own life

> Because empathy isn't useful to society.

things that lack empathy: corporations, machines, AI, psychopaths things that are problematic to society: corporations, machines, AI, psychopaths

Re: Bored of It

#212

Post by baxtr »

jsheard wrote: post #98
terhechte wrote: post #71

I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies: 1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works. 2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it. 3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the na…

The younger generations do seem to be embracing AI more, but mainly because it can do their homework for them without requiring them to learn anything. For now at least, until curriculums have time to adjust to this new reality.

I am old. But when I was young I could not comprehend why they wouldn't not let us use calculators for stupid calculation task that humans have a hard time to compute.

Re: Bored of It

#213

Post by golol »

This exact quote could have been said during every other economic revolution, so to me it just sounds like a mix of complaining about living in times of uncertainty and a conservative mindset.

Re: Bored of It

#214

Post by SkyBelow »

voidhorse wrote: post #185
latexr wrote: post #17

> The best minds of my generation I’m tired of that line. I remember first seeing it on “the best minds of our generation being employed to sell you ads”. Making a computer go brrr doesn’t qualify anyone for a “best mind”. I’d hope a “best mind” would be, above all, empathetic. Concerned about the well being of their fellow humans. Philosophical about the state of the world. Patient. Curious. Wise and not just smart.…

There is one trait common to nearly everyone participating in the computing industry: overweening pride in one's own intelligence. People in the industry like to reduce 'intelligence' to a single dimension. You can see this phenomenon directly in the current AI wave in which "intelligence" has been reduced to "does well at 'knowledge worker' tasks and passes arbitrary benchmarks we have defined".

Compared to the population at large, how does their definition do? Compared to philosophers and neuroscientists, it is lacking, no doubt. But that's the top 1% of the population in being able to define intelligence. So where does this view of intelligence rank compared on a more global sense? It seems better than those who just go with a "I know it when I see it" gut check (especially given how often that gut check is now letting newer models pass as long as they don't know it is an AI model). Or the "humans, because humans are clearly better" view that assigns mythical status to the human brain. Is it in the top 5%? Top 2%?

For a group to come up with a good enough definition that still ranks among the top and which is suited for the specific tasks at hand, seems like a show of intelligence. It isn't perfect, but to what extent is that avoiding premature optimization? Once the definition has issues, it'll be refined more. No need to waste time refining it if we never build tools that hit the limits of the current definition.

Re: Bored of It

#215

Post by y-curious »

wzdd wrote: post #183
terhechte wrote: post #71

I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies: 1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works. 2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it. 3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the na…

I'm a big fan of Douglas Adams, but there is a reason he was (best known as) a comedy writer and not, for example, a sociologist. Trotting this out adds nothing to the conversation and just comes across as vaguely ageist.

Call it ageist, but this aligns with the conversation about "it" at my job. The cutoff is around 42, but there is a significant split by age group of engineers on the value of "it".

Re: Bored of It

#216

Post by zwnow »

mdp2021 wrote: post #184
zwnow wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would I put in the effort if I dont benefit from it though?

There will not be any greater benefit from understanding - it is the general condition to achievement. So: you do benefit from it, and you may want to put effort in it. It will have side effects, such as moral behaviour.

Again, how do I benefit from moral behavior? You do not seem to understand that I do not value these things.

Re: Bored of It

#218

Post by InsideOutSanta »

mdp2021 wrote: post #192
InsideOutSanta wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think this response will convince anyone that you are correct? You still fail to provide an argument; you're just being unpleasant. To what end? Is that what not having empathy in a society feels like? People just talking at each other without any particular goal in mind other than being unpleasant to each other?

> will convince anyone Are you sure that would be the poster's attempt. > you're just being He seems to be discussing, to some of us.

>Are you sure that would be the poster's attempt.

What do you suspect he is attempting to do?

Re: Bored of It

#219

Post by bko »

jsheard wrote: post #98
terhechte wrote: post #71

I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies: 1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works. 2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it. 3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the na…

The younger generations do seem to be embracing AI more, but mainly because it can do their homework for them without requiring them to learn anything. For now at least, until curriculums have time to adjust to this new reality.

I don't know if it's "embracing" it, it's just a fact of life.

I remember in an interview with Marc Andreessen he spoke about introducing his 8 year old to chat gpt. He described the moment as monumental, likening it to "bringing fire down from the mountains." However, his son was unimpressed by the technology, responding, "It's a computer. Of course you ask it questions and it gives you answers. What else is it for?"

Re: Bored of It

#220

Post by SkyBelow »

terhechte wrote: post #71

I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies: 1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works. 2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it. 3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the na…

I'm against calculators in schools due to their detriment on learning.

What's my age?

Post reply on HN