Live data from Hacker News

LLMs as a Cognitive Virus

arxiv.org

231–240 of 244 posts

Re: LLMs as a Cognitive Virus

#231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That will change things for him, or any others taking the same course. Hundreds of millions can't all become contractors, and realistically wont all become contractors. So the issue described is a real social issue, whether he can "just" quit and avoid it or not.

How it reads is that the world has converged on an obviously bad technology. If only you had the chance to control it from top down and you wouldn’t let this mistake happen for you know what’s best for the world. Not only that, it’s double bad because you can’t do anything about it because everyone is under the illusion except you and a few other sensible people. And you would reject the notion that you have agency t…

How the above reads is you can't understand anything wider than your personal affairs.

Or you believe that the world can't possibly converge on a bad technology or practice, and get bad outcomes out of it, while much fewer see potential issues and warn about them.

Both of which can't be taken seriously.

Re: LLMs as a Cognitive Virus

#232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How it reads is that the world has converged on an obviously bad technology. If only you had the chance to control it from top down and you wouldn’t let this mistake happen for you know what’s best for the world. Not only that, it’s double bad because you can’t do anything about it because everyone is under the illusion except you and a few other sensible people. And you would reject the notion that you have agency t…

How the above reads is you can't understand anything wider than your personal affairs. Or you believe that the world can't possibly converge on a bad technology or practice, and get bad outcomes out of it, while much fewer see potential issues and warn about them. Both of which can't be taken seriously.

The world fortunately works under a system that is durable to these problems. You can actually start a company that doesn't use AI if you think it runs better that way. This argument obviously doesn't work because

1. you would decline the agency existing to make a new company

2. you might even say that AI does help companies work better, but its bad for people - suddenly its no longer about the lack of competency of AI but rather how good it is

Re: LLMs as a Cognitive Virus

#233

Not sure why this is interesting; it seems like anything that becomes "popular" could be cast as a "virus", including things like "having a fridge". Why does this give particular insight?

"We invented a new term to express how much we dislike LLMs! Look at us, we certainly deserve your attention!."

Re: LLMs as a Cognitive Virus

#235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How the above reads is you can't understand anything wider than your personal affairs. Or you believe that the world can't possibly converge on a bad technology or practice, and get bad outcomes out of it, while much fewer see potential issues and warn about them. Both of which can't be taken seriously.

The world fortunately works under a system that is durable to these problems. You can actually start a company that doesn't use AI if you think it runs better that way. This argument obviously doesn't work because 1. you would decline the agency existing to make a new company 2. you might even say that AI does help companies work better, but its bad for people - suddenly its no longer about the lack of competency of…

>The world fortunately works under a system that is durable to these problems

The world works under a system that populations have suffered or even whole countries and empires perished because of systemic problems.

If your answer is "but humanity still endured and is alive today", that's a pretty low bar, not to mention moving the goalposts so far they can't even be seen anymore.

>You can actually start a company that doesn't use AI if you think it runs better that way

I can. And it means nothing to the concern of the parent: "For many of us, AI adoption is really an AI mandate". Your solution is "if you don't like your employer demanding you use AI, just start your own company".

Agency doesn't mean do any arbitrary action and there's no risk or downsides.

Will you pay for their expenses to start their own company? Will you personally loan them money? Will you teach them business skills needed to run a company after they've been a regular employee programmer for 2 decades? Will you feed their kids if the company doesn't catch on? Will you find them employment if they have to shut it down and go back to a regular job as a 40 or 50 year old, in this job market, where you can apply for 20 jobs and not even hear back? Oh, and do the same for millions of others, not just your friend or your favorite cousin?

It doesn't matter whether some individual person can make a non-AI company, since the argument was never about the inability to make one.

It was about millions of people pressured to use AI in their jobs whether they like it or not. "Oh, those millions are only pressured because they lack the agency to start their own business" even more out-of-touch that "let them eat cake".

It's the boomer's "pull yourself by the bootstraps" sermon. Like the idea that millions can't find a job because they lack agency and a firm handshake, or that they're in debt because of that latte.

Re: LLMs as a Cognitive Virus

#236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And like a cult to those of us preferring not to engage, for whatever reason, with everyone and their dog telling us that we should (and sometimes getting quite offended, like our refusal to play that game is a personal attack on them for choosing to).

I just find it such a fascinating technology. It's finally fun to be a nerd again! For me it's the same feeling as when I was on the internet in the early '90s and was trying to tell people how useful it would be. I don't hold a grudge against anybody who held out until the iPhone came around or whatever it was that got them to finally realize the usefulness, but I still question why it was so hard to convince so man…

> As is the typical "but it uses so much water!" as the person orders a hamburger.

As is going on about the water thing being somewhat over-blown, while quietly ignoring the other environmental issues:

• The use of energy meaning greater carbon output because that side of the power industry can initially spin up more quickly (in part by using resource that we'd previously decided not to use in favour of other options), an issue exacerbated by the US essentially trying to block one of the alternative options (due to Trump's fear of wind).

• While the use of water might be overstated overall, it is a problem in some places where new datacentres are being planned - this is one of the reasons that some cities are blocking permissions currently.

Other issues with the growth of datacentres is local parts of power grids not being designed to cope with the load and many building plans not taking this into account (and therefore offering investment to help the situation).

And there are economic factors…

[splicing in your other comment to keep things together]

> The cost of engaging is also so slim

For now, because all the providers are currently pumping in the investment money without turning a profit, with the notable exception of the shovel sellers (Nvidia and to a lesser extent AMD and smaller chip makers, ref: https://isaiprofitable.com/). Even most of the paid accounts operate at a loss ATM, it is the Amazon model pushed industry-wide. Unless there is a miraculous improvement in efficiency right around the corner, that is a trap and those becoming dependent on it being a cheap resource are going to get bitten badly when it comes time that those investments start getting called in.

Then there are the problems elsewhere with demand making other equipment much more expensive both for end users and companies.

Of course me opting out won't affect these issues in any meaningful way, but I can at least claim not to be even a small part of the problem. The same for supporting companies that have run roughshod over the sort of IP issues that an individual would have seen ridiculous fines and even prison time for, with slaps on the wrist being the most anyone saw from their actions (at least going by their own public accounting) - I don't want to feel part of that either. And the weighing down sites with constant scraping matter.

And that is before considering that maybe I'm a bit odd and the things it is taking on in my profession are the few parts of it that I haven't grown a dislike for! I want to puzzle over the details and not lose contact with what is actually going on, thankyouverymuch. “It is like being a manager” people say, as if that will attract me despite knowing how many times I've refuse advancement in order to avoid being a manager over the years. That and “why not consider it a remote colleague”, when it is known in the company that remote work really doesn't work for me (i nearly went completely bat-shit in 2020/2021) and only put up with it because I have no choice but to make the effort (I may be in the office, but if the people I'm working with are not then I'm still effectively remote). I foresee a future where most devs have no one to talk to all day but Claude or similar, and before that happens I will have long since left for pastures different (and yes, I know, likely rather menial).

> (and it's freaking everywhere)

So is vaping, I don't fancy trying that either.

> that it has to be an almost religious aversion to not, which I find quite perplexing in itself.

Or a principled aversion. You might not agree with the principals, or consider acting upon them to be pointless self-sacrifice, but that doesn't make them non-existent. The fact that you must have read some of these concerns from a number of people by now but either dismiss them out of hand or just assume those acting on them are nuts, is a soft form of the religious reaction I initially referred to: anything that isn't what you are comfortable with, is pointless, silly, or just plain wrong.

I don't badger colleagues and friends who use the tech for doing so, but by buggery do some of them badger me for not.

Re: LLMs as a Cognitive Virus

#237
post #218

I read the title and thought to myself, "The chance that this is a well-grounded, unbiased, and robust design is close to 0." So I started reading... And having read it, what a terrible piece of science slop this is! There is no observed adoption dataset used to establish that this mechanism explains LLM use better than alternatives such as usefulness, falling prices, workplace requirements, or independent discovery.…

There's an extremely strong, emotionally-based negativity around AI. I suspect that's what you're seeing.

Re: LLMs as a Cognitive Virus

#238

I think there's aspects of this viewpoint that are true. I'm sure I'm less skilled at programming now in some ways than when I started using LLMs, but I'm a lot more productive and I can work on a broader variety of software than I could before. Writing probably weakened people's auditory memory, and calculators probably reduced people's mental math skills, but I don't think either are a net negative. It just require…

I feel like LLMs have been nothing but a boon for me. I have learned so much programming from them. I have over a decade of experience, but honestly, I have always been a below-average programmer. Good enough for boring CRUD work, but not much more. Forget Leetcode, I'd probably get murdered on the easy questions.

So, if anything, I feel like my learning pace has been greatly accelerated. Your point about working on a broader variety of software is really true for me too. I am working on a game that I likely would have never even started had it not been for LLMs. Mind you, I am still doing the vast majority by hand. However, LLMs have been great for little tutorials, setting out a good game plan, etc. It's like having my own little private tutor.

I know enough to not let the LLMs do everything for me. If they do, then I know I will fall into the trap of something breaking, and then I lack the understanding to fix it. I think they should be used to make life easier, but not easy.

Re: LLMs as a Cognitive Virus

#239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tipping points and technological lock-in aren't new (e.g., the printing press, the radio, TV, phones, the internet, etc.). I do absolutely see your distinction, though, that prior technologies may have been less capable of imposing specific belief systems compared to frontier LLMs. That's a fair point, and a key reason why competitive open models are so important. I definitely don't want to be stuck using Google's la…

what about the bible? the most printed book of that era

Fair, I may have tried too hard to see the other side of the argument! Sensitive topic of course, but definitely one of the clearer cases where "just put the book down" has not always an entirely available option.

Re: LLMs as a Cognitive Virus

#240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's this fallacy where one defends a modern idea by citing criticism to an old idea, thus positioning their modern idea as revolutionary as the classical one that survived the filter of time.

Ha, indeed! I misguidedly turned to Reddit somewhat recently when the activity on the programming forum I spent most of my time on died down thanks to LLMs. As I got sucked into reading various shit posting on AI, there are multiple quotes daily along these lines. Many are written in a way as if it's the first time anyone has said it (probably most of them are bots). I finally deleted my Reddit account. Anyway, a par…

D'oh, haven't been successful
Post reply on HN