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

The L in "LLM" Stands for Lying

acko.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 500 posts

Re: The L in "LLM" Stands for Lying

#241

Post by adeelk93 »

aosnsbbz wrote: post #175
noemit wrote: post #106

Many people don't know this, but the Luddites were right. I studied Art History and this particular movement. One of the claims of the Luddites is that quality would go down, because their craft took half a lifetime to master (it was passed down from parent to chile.) I was able to feel wool scarves made in europe from the middle ages. (In museum storage, under the guidance of a curator) They are a fundamentally diff…

A big difference is cutting quality for the sake of mass production when it enables creating more necessities for people to live is a good thing. It is a good tradeoff. Cutting quality to make previously deterministic software more non deterministic does not improve anyones life except Sam Altman, Dario Amodei and the rest of the billionaire class. I have no doubt in the future there will be a class of vibe software…

Was software authorship ever deterministic? Whether it be human or AI, the output can vary wildly, and is constrained by the finite specifications provided.

Re: The L in "LLM" Stands for Lying

#242

Post by runarberg »

delaminator wrote: post #65
theshrike79 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also "AI" has been in gaming, especially mobile gaming, for a literal decade already. Household name game studios have had custom AI art asset tooling for a long time that can create art quickly, using their specific style. AI is a tool and as Steve Jobs said, you can hold it wrong. It's like plastic surgery, you only notice the bad ones and object to them. An expert might detect the better jobs, but the regular folk…

"I hate CGI video" "So you hated the TV Series Ugly Betty then?" "What? that's not CGI!" This video is 15 years old https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDjorAhcnbY

Your case would have been better if you had used Mad Max: Fury Road, or even Titanic as examples, rather then a mediocre TV show nobody remembers. Ugly Betty used green screens to make production cheaper, that did not improve the show (although it may have improved the profit margins). Mad Max: Fury Road on the other hand used CGI to significantly improve the visual experience. The added CGI probably increased the cost of the production, and subsequently it is one of the greatest, most awesome, movie ever made.

Actually if you look at the scene from Greys Anatomy [0:54] you can see where CGI is used to improve the scene (rather then cut costs), and you get this amazing scene of the Washington State Ferry crash.

I think you can see the parallels here. When people say they hate AI they are generally referring to the sloppy stuff it generates. It has enabled a proliferation of cheap slop. And with few exception it seems like generating cheap slop is all it does (these exception being specialized tools e.g. in image processing software).

Re: The L in "LLM" Stands for Lying

#243

Post by Ensorceled »

Almondsetat wrote: post #206
Ensorceled wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is it wildly uneducated to not know any of the games you mentioned? I didn’t realize education covered less known video games? Yes. It is "wildly uneducated" to have, and express, strong opinions about ANY field of endeavour where you are unfamiliar with large parts of that field.

Large? That's your opinion

Of course it is.

Re: The L in "LLM" Stands for Lying

#244

Post by llm_nerd »

SirMaster wrote: post #240
raincole wrote: post #34

> Video games stand out as one market where consumers have pushed back effectively No, it's simply untrue. Players only object against AI art assets. And only when they're painfully obvious. No one cares about how the code is written. If you actually read the words used in Steam AI survey you'll know Steam has completely caved in for AI-gen code as well. It's specifically worded like this: > content such as artwork,…

>No one cares about how the code is written. People definitely do care. Nobody wants vibe-coded buggy slop code for their game. They want well designed and optimized code that runs the game smoothly on reasonable hardware and without a bunch of bugs.

Your second paragraph does not follow, at all, from the first. These are completely orthogonal demands.

The gaming industry is absolutely overwhelmed with outrageously inefficient, garbage, crash-prone code. It has become the norm, and it has absolutely nothing to do with AI.

Like https://nee.lv/2021/02/28/How-I-cut-GTA-Online-loading-times.... That something so outrageously trash made it to a hundreds-of-million dollar game, cursing millions to 10+ minute waits, should shame everyone involved. It's actually completely normal in that industry. Trash code, thoughtless and lazily implemented, is the norm.

Most game studios would likely hugely improve their game, har har, if they leveraged AI a lot more.

Re: The L in "LLM" Stands for Lying

#245

Post by roesel »

SirMaster wrote: post #240
raincole wrote: post #34

> Video games stand out as one market where consumers have pushed back effectively No, it's simply untrue. Players only object against AI art assets. And only when they're painfully obvious. No one cares about how the code is written. If you actually read the words used in Steam AI survey you'll know Steam has completely caved in for AI-gen code as well. It's specifically worded like this: > content such as artwork,…

>No one cares about how the code is written. People definitely do care. Nobody wants vibe-coded buggy slop code for their game. They want well designed and optimized code that runs the game smoothly on reasonable hardware and without a bunch of bugs.

No one wants _buggy slop code_ for their game, but ultimately no one cares whether is has been hand crafted or vibe-coded.

As proof, ask yourself which of the following two options you would prefer:

1. buggy code that was hand-written 2. optimized code that was vibe-coded

I'll bet most people will choose 2.

Re: The L in "LLM" Stands for Lying

#248

Post by adamtaylor_13 »

This argument falls apart on the very first bullet point. The author claims:

> If someone produces a painting in the style of Van Gogh, and passes it off as being made by Van Gogh, by putting his signature on it, that painting is a forgery.

Which is true. But the implication that follows is false.

Van Gogh's artwork is valuable specifically because of his identity. I find much of his artwork particularly hideous. That's fine! Someone else finds value in it specifically because of who wrote it.

This metaphor doesn't appear to apply to code at all. The entire value of code is what it does not who wrote it.

Honestly, I stopped reading after the first bullet point because these types of arguments feel lazy and the attitude of the people writing these articles frequently comes across as holier than thou.

You don't like LLMs? Great, don't use them. Using Van Gogh's paintbrush doesn't mean I'm making a forgery. I'm just painting, my friend.

Re: The L in "LLM" Stands for Lying

#249

Post by amiga386 »

raincole wrote: post #34

> Video games stand out as one market where consumers have pushed back effectively No, it's simply untrue. Players only object against AI art assets. And only when they're painfully obvious. No one cares about how the code is written. If you actually read the words used in Steam AI survey you'll know Steam has completely caved in for AI-gen code as well. It's specifically worded like this: > content such as artwork,…

> Players only object against AI art assets. And only when they're painfully obvious.

Restaurant-goers only object against you spitting in their food if it's painfully obvious (i.e. they see you do it, or they taste it)

Players are buying your art. They are valuing it based on how you say you made it. They came down hard on asset-flipping shovelware before the rise of AI (where someone else made the art and you just shoved it together... and the combination didn't add up to much) and they come down hard on AI slop today, especially if you don't disclose it and you get caught.

Re: The L in "LLM" Stands for Lying

#250

Post by layer8 »

raincole wrote: post #143
Sharlin wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yeah, exactly. And LLM help developers save time from writing the same thing that has be done by other developers for a thousand times. Before LLMs we did already have a way to "save developers time from writing the same thing that has been done by other developers for a thousand times", you know? A LLM doing the same thing the 1001st time is not code reuse. Code reuse is code reuse.

Because code reuse is hard. Like, really hard. If it weren't we wouldn't be laughing at left-pad. If it weren't hard we wouldn't have so many front-end JavaScript frameworks. If it weren't Unreal wouldn't still have their own GC and std-like implementation today. Java wouldn't have been reinventing build system every five years. The whole history of programming tool is exploring how to properly reuse code: are functi…

The problems with leftpad are a problem with the NPM ecosystem, not with code reuse as such. There are other dependency ecosystems that don't have these problems.
Post reply on HN