Live data from Hacker News

The Cognitive Dark Forest

ryelang.org

221–230 of 301 posts

Re: The Cognitive Dark Forest

#221
> The comments can be even more interesting and thought provoking than the post

I love this ending. I don't agree with author's views. But the article is very coherent, thought provoking. And definitely the comments here on HN are even more interesting.

Re: The Cognitive Dark Forest

#222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want to go too far down the conspiracy rabbit hole, but the vendors know everyone's prompts so it would be trivial for them to track the trackers and spoof the results. We already know that they substitute different models as a cost-saving measure, so substituting models to fool the repeated evaluations would be trivial. We also already know that they actively seek out viral examples of poor performance on ce…

If a claim is unfalsifiable, it contains no information

What I said is quite far from unfalsifiable. Any number of insiders could step forward and set the record straight.

Re: The Cognitive Dark Forest

#223
Reminds me of Gary Marcus's argument: LLMs (the forest) aren't genuinely intelligent, but the LLM providers can - by feeding off from the vast amounts of user data - make them simply memorized enough to turn every out-of-distribution challenge into an in-distribution retrieval and mixing task without having 'AI' that is ever truly intelligent i.e. can generalise.

Re: The Cognitive Dark Forest

#224
post #219

I guess not many people know but app templates for Uber, AirBnb etc. have been around for years now. You don’t even have to prompt. It’s sitting on the shelf, complete. “Execution is hard” was never about the code part. Up until 2 years ago I was an engineer/entrepreneur. I could build anything. Other stuff, selling, supporting (execution) was hard. LLMs made building some of the things I could build faster/easier, o…

Couldn't agree more. The opportunity cost of executing something is maintaining it. And that's where the real cost lies. Big companies won't execute our ideas because they need maintain everything that they execute. Plus, the cost of modifying something that was executed itself is also very high at a big company.

This is how I feel about AI coding in general. I see business users getting excited about building 60% of an application themselves - but have zero clue that the remaining 40% will take 5x as long, and oh, by the way, you now have to maintain it for the next decade - and what happens when you leave and no one can figure out why payroll doesn't work anymore?

Coding has always been the easy bit.

Re: The Cognitive Dark Forest

#229
post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't buy the analogy. The problem with Kessler syndrome is that low earth orbit is physically crowded, you run into collisions. I don't care about the garbage. I don't care about the AI era. I've been writing code in Emacs for 20 years, I'll be writing code in Emacs in 20 years, every open source project I contribute to still looks the same because all these AI people, like the blockchain people do is just make ne…

> I've been writing code in Emacs for 20 years, I'll be writing code in Emacs in 20 years Bold assumption. On what will you run Emacs if average PC costs $12000? Yes. Even Raspberry Pi. It's not called war on general computing for nothing. If you say the cloud, that will be cut up and reused by the next AI crawler.

You can use old hardware.

Re: The Cognitive Dark Forest

#230
post #6

Dark forest makes no sense to me. Why would a civilization eradicate another, spending huge amounts of resources (time, energy, material) when the universe has such an enormous scale that you cannot even get to each other in a timescale that makes much sense...

Makes some sense to me, as the prisoner's dilemma dictates at least some fraction will try to kill you. So you've got to go first. Reminds me of the Dan Carlin take on aircraft carriers in World War II: if you in a carrier spotted an opposing carrier and didn't send everything you had before it spotted you, you were dead. The only move was to go all in every time.

Surely that logic applies if you're at war with the other side? If you start attacking carriers of random superpowers, you only invite further destruction...
Post reply on HN