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

The Rise of Whatever

eev.ee

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 537 posts

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#261

Post by sanitycheck »

cousin_it wrote: post #63

This reminds me of the normie/autistic/sociopath triangle. The idea is that sociopaths can see through normies, normies can see through autists, and autists can see through sociopaths - when there's a sociopath, often the normies in the group will be easily fooled by him, but the autists will be onto him right away. Don't know why that is, but it's true in my experience. Same with AI. I'm notably more autistic (or mo…

Is this a known thing? I've called myself 'immune to charisma' which seems at least related, and I've thought perhaps it's an autistic/aspie trait but have never come across any studies or articles mentioning it.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#262

Post by yieldcrv »

georgeecollins wrote: post #91
yieldcrv wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you made every incorporated and unincorporated organization and product line and revenue stream to be fractionalized and publicly traded it would look the same its just a filtering problem there are screeners to narrow everything down just like for the stock exchanges

To quote the article: >> But also… why do you care? Why would someone using a really cool tool that makes them more productive… feel compelled to sneer and get defensive at the mere suggestion that someone else isn’t doing the same? >> It feels like the same attitude that happened with Bitcoin, the same smug nose-wrinkling contempt. Bitcoin is the future. It’ll replace the dollar by 2020. You’re gonna be left behind.…

Evangelists can be ignored if you want, not all promoted use cases are relevant

Its all about blockspace and the commodity that pays for the blockspace

That was true when bitcoin was 2 cents and its true when bitcoin is $109,000 and 2 cents

I mean, are you enjoying your socioeconomic status? the chronology was very clear to some and they were right. It wasn’t luck, it wasn’t a really binary proposition. you can read old threads around the net from 2012 to see exactly where we are going. you can help make that happen or passively act surprised. pretty much every theorized issue can be programmed away, thats what gives people confidence in this asset class compared to others.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#263

Post by pm215 »

lovich wrote: post #223
pm215 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's still a difference even if you look at it as "supervising a bunch of juniors". I'm happy to review the output of a human in that case because I believe that even if they got some stuff wrong and it might have been quicker and more interesting for me to just do the thing, the process is helping them learn and get better, which is both good in itself and also means that over time I have to do the superv…

>… the process is helping them learn and get better, which is both good in itself and also means that over time I have to do the supervision and support part less and less. Supervising an LLM misses out both of those aspects, so it's just not-very-fun work. Legitimately I think you are missing my point. What I quoted out of your response could be applied to prompt engineering/managment/tinkering. I think everyone who…

No, I really don't think that prompt engineering is the same thing. Anything I put in the prompt may help this particular conversation, but a fresh instance of the LLM will be exactly the way it was before I started. Improvements in the LLM will happen because the LLM vendor releases a new model, not because I "taught" it anything.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#264

Post by lmm »

Al-Khwarizmi wrote: post #118

I disagree with many of the points on LLMs (but broadly agree with 80% of the post). But regardless of agreeing or not, it was a pleasure to read this because it's beautifully written, the arguments are solid, it makes you think, and the website has a personality, which is rare nowadays. I clicked halfheartedly, started to read halfheartedly, and got sucked into a read that threw me back into the good old days of the…

Eevee writes well but this is not one of her better posts IMO. Too many micro-digs at people who are white or straight, too much of the Twitter/Bluesky tone where you drop a snark bomb on the heckin' evil du jour and then just move on. If anything I'd say this has a lot less personality than older posts I remember.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#265

Post by fhe »

badpun wrote: post #137
lan321 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The microwave analogy is good. I still use it, even though it often makes half my food scalding hot while the other half remains fridge cold.

You should set the microwave to much lower power and let it heat for much longer, so that the heat gets to transfer evenly across the mass of the food. It even says so in the instruction manual. If you blast with full power, leave the food for at least 2 minutes after it's heated for the heat to balance out across the food (again, it's in the manual).

or turn the food over, or move it to a different position inside the microwave -- the way microwave works is that it heats up the food unevenly (there's a wave involved).

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#266

Post by EraYaN »

sunnybeetroot wrote: post #207
Al-Khwarizmi wrote: post #118

I disagree with many of the points on LLMs (but broadly agree with 80% of the post). But regardless of agreeing or not, it was a pleasure to read this because it's beautifully written, the arguments are solid, it makes you think, and the website has a personality, which is rare nowadays. I clicked halfheartedly, started to read halfheartedly, and got sucked into a read that threw me back into the good old days of the…

It is a nice read but something tells me it’s AI generated due to the frequent em dashes so I wouldn’t place all bets on it being entirely human written. Edit: I apologies, the author has pre-gpt posts that use em dashes so likely it’s part of their writing style.

If you use a nice enough writing tool it will do en/em and any other dash for you semi automatically anyway. Even Word does it when AutoFormat is turned on. Although it normally chooses the En-dash (U+2013) instead of the Em-dash (U+2014), this also depends on your language.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#267

Post by eesmith »

JW_00000 wrote: post #84
zwnow wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My guy its not only about the art its about killing passion and the lifeline of people. Your take is incredibly ignorant to people who value human created work. These things will kill industries. What jobs should people work in, who got their income cut by LLMs? Force them into blue collar work?

But isn't that the same as saying: what about all the horse carrier drivers who lost their jobs due to cars? What about all the bank tellers we lost after inventing the automated teller machine?

The number of bank tellers did not drop after ATMs starting in use. https://conversableeconomist.com/2015/03/03/atms-and-a-risin...

That said, yes, what about them? These are people with real skin the the game - people who spent years learning their craft expecting it will be their life-long career.

Do we simply exclaim "sucks to be you!"?

Do we tell out-of-work coal miners to switch to a career in programming with the promise it will be a lucrative career move? And when employment opportunities in software development collapse, then what?

All while we increasingly gate health care on being employed?

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#268

Post by worldsayshi »

zwnow wrote: post #93
worldsayshi wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your point is very valid. It is the luddite argument. And that is valid. But the problem is never the technology itself but, as you point out, the loss of livelihood and meaning and especially the shifts in power from the many to the few. We need to learn to make technology truly benefit the many. Also in terms of power.

Yes, fully agree. Can't believe we live in a timeline in which big tech companies steal data from the many, use this data to train models, sell this data while also convincing technological illiterate people their propaganda machines (social media) is useful to them... Now they want to buy nuclear power plants too. Im sure nothing will go wrong there.

It's all downstream from the way the economy works, and the economy is (I think) downstream from the tools we use to coordinate effort. If we can evolve the way which we handle resource allocation, trust and effort coordination I emphatically believe there's at least some some hope that we can create an alternative economy. Which it seems that we urgently need as a civilization.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#269

Post by AndrewDucker »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #194

I think I share the conclusion, but coming at it from the other side. The point of doing things is the act of doing them, not the result. And if we make the result easily obtainable by using an LLM then this gets reinforced not destroyed. I'm going to use sketching as an example, because it's something I enjoy but am very bad at. But you could talk in the same way about playing a musical instrument, writing code, wri…

The point of nearly everything I do in the office is the result, not the doing.

For art/craft you are completely correct though.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#270

Post by intrasight »

ninetyninenine wrote: post #97
raincole wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People will write lengthy and convoluted explanation on why LLM isn't like calculator or microwave oven or other technology before. (Like OP's article) But it really is. Humans have been looking for easier and lazier ways to do things since the dawn of civilization. Tech never ever prevents people who really want to hone their skills from doing so. World record of 100m sprint kept improving even since car was invente…

>People will write lengthy and convoluted explanation on why LLM isn't like calculator or microwave oven or other technology before. (Like OP's article) But it really is. You generally don't need a lengthy explanation because it's common sense. When someone doesn't get it then people have to go into lengthy convoluted explanations because they are trying to elucidate common sense to someone who doesn't get it. I mean…

> The first thing is we don't understand it.

Perhaps you do not understand it, but many software engineers do understand.

Of the human brain we can still say that we don't understand it.

Post reply on HN