After the AI boom: what might we be left with?

Post by lxgr » Sun, Oct 12, 2025, 10:29 PM UTC

dotnet00 wrote: post #189

bluesnowmonkey wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to verify everything from human developers too. They hallucinate APIs when they try to write code from memory. So we have: - documentation - design reviews - type systems - code review - unit tests - continuous integration - integration testing - Q&A process - etc. It turns out when include all these processes, teams of error-prone human developers can produce complex working software. Mostly -- sometimes th…

Taking the example of egyptian archeology, if you're reading the work of someone who is well regarded as an expert in the field, you can trust their word a lot more than you can trust the word of an AI, even if the AI is provided the text you're reading. This is a pretty massive difference between the two, and your narrative is part of why AI is proving to be so harmful for education in general. Delusional dreamers a…

Post by bc569a80a344f9c » Sun, Oct 12, 2025, 10:30 PM UTC

cactusplant7374 wrote: post #183

bc569a80a344f9c wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole point of the article is that the dotcom era produced long term assets that stayed valuable for decades after the bubble burst, and argues that the AI era is producing short term assets that won’t be of much use if the bubble bursts.

But the chips of the dotcom era were not long-term assets. The author appears to claim that.

Post by dcminter » Sun, Oct 12, 2025, 10:32 PM UTC

mikert89 wrote: post #197

dcminter wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"AI" has been doing that since the 1950s though. The problem is that each time we define something and say "only an intelligent machine can X" we find out that X is woefully inadequate as an example of real intelligence. Like hilariously so. e.g. "play chess" - seemed perfectly reasonable at the time, but clearly 1980s budget chess computers are not "intelligent" in any very useful way regardless of how Sci Fi they w…

yeah im in agreement, ai will eventually do everything a human being can

Post by lxgr » Sun, Oct 12, 2025, 10:33 PM UTC

KPGv2 wrote: post #96

elorant wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speech to text and vice versa exists for over a decade. Where's the life altering application from that?

> Speech to text and vice versa exists for over a decade. Indeed. I was using speech to text three decades ago. Dragon Naturally Speaking was released in the 90s.

Post by hiq » Sun, Oct 12, 2025, 10:34 PM UTC

tyleo wrote: post #146

rz2k wrote: post #108

Local/open-weight models are already incredibly competent. Right now a Mac Studio with 256GB can be found for less than $5000, and an equivalent workstation will likely be 50% cheaper in a year. If anything that price is higher because of the boom, rather than subsidized by a potential bubble. It can run a 8bit quant of GPT-OSS 120B, or 4bit quant of GLM-4.6 using only an extra 100-200W. That energy use comes out to…

I have an M4 MBP and I also think Apple is set up quite nicely to take real advantage of local models. They already work on the most expensive Apple hardware. I expect that price to come down in the next few years. It’s really just the UX that’s bad but that’s solvable. Apple isn’t having to pay for each users power and use either. They sell hardware once and folks pay with their own electricity to run it.