Live data from Hacker News

Let's be honest, Generative AI isn't going all that well

garymarcus.substack.com

251–260 of 346 posts

Re: Let's be honest, Generative AI isn't going all that well

#251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Code is a liability. What the code does for you is an asset." as quoted from https://wiki.c2.com/?SoftwareAsLiability with Last edit December 17, 2013. This discussion and distinction used to be well known, but I'm happy to help some people become "one of today's lucky 10,000" as quoted from https://xkcd.com/1053/ because it is indeed much more interesting than the alternative approach.

It’s well known and also wrong. Delta’s airplanes also require a great deal of maintenance, and I’m sure they strive to have no more than are necessary for their objectives. But if you talk to one of Delta’s accountants, they will be happy to disabuse you of the notion that the planes are entered in the books as a liability.

Whoa whoa whoa let's not bring the accountants in!

Code isn't a liability b/c it costs money (though it does). Code is a liability like an unsafe / unproven bridge is a liability. It works fine until it doesn't - and at that point you're in trouble. Just b/c you can build lots of bridges now, doesn't mean each new bridge isn't also a risk. But if you gotta get somewhere now, conjuring bridges might be the way to go. Doesn't make each bridge not a liability (risky thing to rely on) or an asset (thing you can sell, use to build value)

Re: Let's be honest, Generative AI isn't going all that well

#252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that even if it never improves, its current state is already pretty useful. I do think it's going to improve though I don't think AGI is going to happen any time soon. I have no idea what this is called, but it feels like a lot of people assume that progress will continue at a linear pace for forever for things, when I think that generally progress is closer to a "staircase" shape. A new invention or discover…

Yes I've read about something like before - like the jump from living in 1800 to 1900 - you go from no electricity at home to having electricity at home for example. The jump from 1900 to 2000 is much less groundbreaking for the electricity example - you have more appliances and more reliable electricity but it's nothing like the jump from candle to light bulb.

Maybe you meant 1900s to 2000s but if you meant the year 1900 to the year 2000 then that century of difference saw a lot more innovation than just the "candle to lightbulb" change of 1800 to 1900.

I'll interpret it as meaning 1800s to 1900s to 2000s. I'd argue that we haven't yet seen the same step change as 1800s to 1900s this century because we're only just beginning the ramp up on the new technology that will drive progress this century similar to how in 1926 they were still ramping up on the use of electricity and internal combustion engines.

Let's take electricity as the primary example though since it's the one you mentioned and it's probably more similar to our current situation with AI. The similarities include the need for central generating stations to supply raw power to end users as well as the need for products designed to make use of that power and provide some utility to the consumer. Efficiency of generation is also a primary concern for both as it's a major cost driver. Both of those required significant investment and effort to solve in the early days of electrification.

We're now solving similar problems with AI, instead of power plants we're building datacenters, instead of lightbulbs and washing machines we're developing chat bot integrations and agents, instead of improving dynamos we're improving GPUs and TPUs. I fully expect we'll follow a similar curve for deployment as we find new uses, improve existing ones and integrate this new power source into an increasing number of domains.

We do have one major advantage though, we've already built The Grid for distribution which saves a massive amount of effort.

This article is a good read on the permeation of electricity through the economy

https://www.construction-physics.com/p/the-birth-of-the-grid

Re: Let's be honest, Generative AI isn't going all that well

#253
Gary Marcus again. The chief doomer of AI where goal posts keep on moving.

Almost everyone around me, even the primary school kids use ChatGPT/Perplexity/Gemini/Claude in some form on almost a daily basis. The daily engagement is v strong.

The models keep improving every year. Nano banana gets text spot on, human anatomy of digits and toes is spot on. Deep Research mode is mind boggling. All the major vendors have some form of voice interaction, and it feels pretty good. I use perplexity talk feature while driving to learn deep about a topic of interest.

The trend is strong, betting against the trend isn't wise.

I can paste entire books and ask questions about certain pieces. The context windows nowadays are wild.

Price per token keeps on dropping, more capability keeps on coming online.

Gary offers no solutions, just complaints.

Re: Let's be honest, Generative AI isn't going all that well

#254
post #239
post #237

All I know is that I have built more in the past 10 months than I ever have. How do you quantify for the skeptics the mental shift that happens when you know you can just build stuff now? COULD I do this stuff before? Sure. But I wouldn’t have. Life gets in the way. Now, the bar is low so why not build stuff? Some of it ships, some of it is just experimentation. It’s all building. Trying to quantify that shift is imp…

"I have built more in the past 10 months than I ever have." Correction. The genAI has built it. I haven't got any skin on either side here, but doesn't the fact the genAI can build it imply that what you are doing is heavily trodden ground, that there will be less and less need for developers like you, and will gradually lead to many developers (like you) being cut out of the market entirely. For personal stuff it's…

"The genAI has built it" -- this is the core point. If I did nothing except complain about AI for the past 10 months, would these projects exist? No they would not. So. I. Built. It.

If you actually use these tools, really use them. You realize that it's an augmentation not a replacement. Simply because the training data is what has already come before (for now!). The LLMs need help, direction, focus...and those are learned skills dependent on the tooling. Not to mention ideas.

And sure, I imagine the software development workforce will change quite a bit, probably this year, no doubt about that.

But the need for builders will not change. I imagine that the 'builder' role will change to be traditional software developers, designers, sales people, writers, c-suite...whatever.

So I think you are right. "That could easily exclude you or me". 100% correct. The required skill set to be a builder is changing on a weekly basis. The only way to keep up is to keep building with these tools. Trying things. Experimenting. Otherwise, yes, you will probably be replaced. By a builder.

Re: Let's be honest, Generative AI isn't going all that well

#255
post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, this sounds like: AI is helping me solve all the issues that using AI has caused. Wordpress has a pretty good export and Markdown is widely supported. If you estimate 1 month of work to get that into NextJS, then maybe the latter is not a suitable choice.

it's wild that somehow with regards to AI conversations lately someone can say "I saved 3 months doing X" and someone can willfully and thoughtfully reply "No you didn't , you're wrong." without hesitation. I feel bad for AI opponents mostly because it seems like the drive to be against the thing is stronger than the drive towards fact or even kindness. My .02c: I am saving months of efforts using AI tools to fix old…

It is wild. I must admit I have a bit of Gell Mann amnesia when it comes to HN comments. I often check them to see what people think about an article, but then every time the article touches on something I know deeply, I realize it’s all just know-it-all puffery. Then I forget and check it when it’s on the many things I do not know much about.

My cofounder is extremely technically competent, but all these people are like good luck with your spaghetti vibe code. It’s humorous.

Re: Let's be honest, Generative AI isn't going all that well

#256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That seems very unimaginative to me. Does it? How exactly is the common Joe going to benefit from this world where the robots are doing the job he was doing before, as well as everyone else's job (aka, no more jobs for anyone )? Where exactly is the money going to come from to make sure Joe can still buy food? Why on earth would the people in power (aka the psychotic CxOs) care to expend any resources for Joe, once…

To me it's completely baffling how people imagine that with human labor largely going obsolete, we will just stick with capitalism and all workers go hungry in some dystopian fantasy. Many cynics seem to believe rich people are demons with zero consideration for their fellow humans. Rich and powerful persons are still people just like you, and they have an interest in keeping the general population happy. Not to ment…

> Many cynics seem to believe rich people are demons with zero consideration for their fellow humans.

Do they have considerations for their fellow humans? I certainly haven't observed that they give a shit about anyone or anything that isn't their bottom line. What exactly has Zuckerberg contributed to this world and to his fellow man, other than a mass data harvesting operation that has enabled real life genocides?

"They 'trust me'. Dumb fucks." - Zuckerberg, talking about Facebook users.

What has Bezos done for the average Amazon warehouse worker, other than stick them in grueling conditions where they even have their toilet breaks timed, just to squeeze out every single inch of life out of his workers he can? What have the people working for Big Oil done that is beneficial to humanity, other than suppressing climate change research and funding lobbying groups to hide the fact that they knew about climate change since the 70s? What have the tobacco execs done for humanity, other than bribing doctors to falsify medical research indicating that tobacco isn't harmful? I could go on and on about all the evils brought on to the world by psychotic executives and their sycophantic legions sucking the teet hoping for a handout, but we'd be here all day.

Sure, there's a few philanthropists out there bobbing around in the ocean of soulless psychopaths that are doing some good things, but they're very much the exception.

> Not to mention that we have democratic mechanisms that give power to the masses.

Even (especially?) just looking solely from a US POV, these democratic mechanisms are quickly and actively being eroded by these "considerate" billionaires like Thiel (who is quite openly & proudly naming his companies using literally evil things from Tolkien's works). They're talking about taking over Greenland to distract from them all being ousted as pedophiles for fuck's sake, what "democractic mechanisms"?

> We will obviously transition to a system where most of us can live a comfortable life without working a full time job, and it's going to be great.

I again don't see how this is "obvious", and you haven't outlined anything about how this utopia is supposed to work other than extremely vague statements. How is this utopian state more obvious than the one we are currently freefalling into, a dystopian police state where your every breath is being tracked in some database that is then shared with anyone with 3 pennies to pay to access the data?

Re: Let's be honest, Generative AI isn't going all that well

#257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it were terrible, you wouldn't use them, right? Isn't the fact that you continue to use AI coding tools a sign that you find them a net positive? Or is it being imposed on you? > And to the parents point, I’m doing something wrong for noticing that? There's nothing wrong pointing out your experience. What the OP was implying was he expects them to be able to copy/paste reliably almost 100% of the time, and not hal…

I was the person who said it can't copy from examples without making up APIs but. > he'll never get that with LLMs, and that their inability to do so isn't a barrier to getting productive use out of them. This is _exactly_ what the comment thread we're in said - and I agree with him. > The whole discourse around LLMs is so utterly exhausting. If I say I don't like them for almost any reason, I'm a luddite. If I compl…

Apologies. I confused you with drewbug up in the thread.

Re: Let's be honest, Generative AI isn't going all that well

#258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Meanwhile, my cofounder is rewriting code we spent millions of salary on in the past by himself in a few weeks. Why? Im not even casting shade - I think AI is quite amazing for coding and can increase productivity and quality a lot. But I'm curious why he's doing this.

The codebase is old and really hard to work on. It’s a game that existed pre-iPhone and still has decent revenue but could use some updating. We intentionally shrank our company down to auto-pilot mode and frankly don’t even have a working development environment anymore. It was basically cost prohibitive to change anything significant until Claude became able to do most of the work for us. My cofounder (also CTO of…

Millions? Of people in self driving teslas?

The actual number of such vehicles produced is two orders of magnitude less.

Re: Let's be honest, Generative AI isn't going all that well

#259
post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're hinting at the underlying problem with the quote. "Asset" in the quote reads, at least to me, in the financial or accounting meaning of the term. "Liability" reads, again to me, in the sense of potential risk rather than the financial meaning. Its apples and oranges.

Liability is also an economic term. As in, "The bank's assets (debt) are my liability, and my assets (house) are the bank's liability." I don't think it's a wrong quote. Code's behavior is the asset, and code's source is the liability. You want to achieve maximum functionality for minimal source code investment.

Sorry, my point wasn't that liability doesn't have a meaning in finance. My read of the quote is that it uses liability in the sense of risk not debt on a balance sheet.

I could always be wrong though, that was just my interpretation of it. I don't get how code could be a liability in the financial sense, but I do get how every line of code risks bugs and other issues.

Re: Let's be honest, Generative AI isn't going all that well

#260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me it's completely baffling how people imagine that with human labor largely going obsolete, we will just stick with capitalism and all workers go hungry in some dystopian fantasy. Many cynics seem to believe rich people are demons with zero consideration for their fellow humans. Rich and powerful persons are still people just like you, and they have an interest in keeping the general population happy. Not to ment…

> Many cynics seem to believe rich people are demons with zero consideration for their fellow humans. Do they have considerations for their fellow humans? I certainly haven't observed that they give a shit about anyone or anything that isn't their bottom line. What exactly has Zuckerberg contributed to this world and to his fellow man, other than a mass data harvesting operation that has enabled real life genocides?…

Even in the utopia scenario, that experiment has been taken to its natural conclusion on rats back in the 70s and the results were...interesting, to say the least. (google "Universe 25"). I feel like in many ways, a devolution to feudalism and tribal warfare would be preferable.
Post reply on HN