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

261–270 of 500 posts

Re: The L in "LLM" Stands for Lying

#261

Post by gabrieledarrigo »

incomingpain wrote: post #214

I find these criticisms to be similar to those low context brain teasers. If a woman gets married at 25 and her kid is 25, how old is she? This is what LLMs are dealing with. You dont tell them everything they need to know and they are left to fill in the gaps. Which may, and sometimes often means they lie. That's what Agentic does differently, it'll go find the gaps before answering. Agentic is AGI. You can hire man…

> You can hire many minimum wage workers who are generally intelligent who dont even go to that level.

That's pretty rude to say, at minimum.

Re: The L in "LLM" Stands for Lying

#262

Post by bandrami »

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…

I have terrible news: LLMs don't actually make it easier, though it feels like they do at first

Re: The L in "LLM" Stands for Lying

#263

Post by naasking »

runarberg wrote: post #234
porridgeraisin wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A library is a collection of data structures functions. My argument still holds. > Syntactic reuse would be macros Well sure. My point is that what can be reused is decided ahead of time and encoded in the syntax. Whereas with LLMs it is not, and is encoded in the semantics. > Pragmatics Didn't know what that is. Consider my post updated with the better terms.

I’m not sure your logic is sound. It sounds like you are insisting on some nuance which simply isn’t there. LLM generates unmaintainable slop, which is extremely difficult to reason about, uses wrong abstractions, violates DRY, violates cohesion, etc. The industry has known how to reuse codes for two decades now (npm was released 16 years ago; pip 18 years ago). Using LLMs for code reuse is a step in the wrong direct…

> LLM generates unmaintainable slop

LLMs generate what you tell them to, which means it will be slop if you're careless and good if you're careful, just like programming in general.

Re: The L in "LLM" Stands for Lying

#265

Post by LetsGetTechnicl »

wepple wrote: post #196
wolvesechoes wrote: post #155

I am bit tired of such discussions. I don't care if LLMs are good at coding or bad at it (in my experience the answer is "it depends"). I don't care how good are they at anything else. What matters in the end is that this tech is not to empower a common person (although it could). It is not here to make our lives better, more worthwhile, more satisfying (it could do these as well). It is there to reduce our agency, t…

> It is there to reduce our agency, to make it easier to fire us, to put us in even more precarious position Could be. It could also end up freeing us from every commercial dependency we have. Write your own OS, your own mail app, design your own machinery to farm with. It’s here, so I don’t know where you’re going with “I’m unhappy this is happening and someone should do something”

  It could also end up freeing us from every commercial dependency we have. Write your own OS, your own mail app, design your own machinery to farm with.
Lmfao LLM's can barely count rows in a spreadsheet accurately, this is just batshit crazy.

edit: also the solution here isn't that every one writes their own software (based on open source code available on the internet no doubt) we just use that open source software, and people learn to code and improve it themselves instead of off-loading it to a machine

Re: The L in "LLM" Stands for Lying

#266

Post by wolvesechoes »

idopmstuff wrote: post #251
wepple wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is there to reduce our agency, to make it easier to fire us, to put us in even more precarious position Could be. It could also end up freeing us from every commercial dependency we have. Write your own OS, your own mail app, design your own machinery to farm with. It’s here, so I don’t know where you’re going with “I’m unhappy this is happening and someone should do something”

It's also worth nothing that the "our" in that sentence is just SWEs, who are a pretty small group in the grand scheme of things. I recognize that's a lot of HN, but still bears considering in terms of the broader impact outside of that group. I'm a small business owner, and AI has drastically increased my agency. I can do so much more - I've built so many internal tools and automated so many processes that allow me…

> It's also worth nothing that the "our" in that sentence is just SWEs

It isn't, it just a matter of seeing ahead of the curve. Delegating stuff to AI and agents by necessity leads to atrophy of skills that are being delegated. Using AI to write code leads to reduced capability to write code (among people). Using AI for decision-making reduces capability for making decisions. Using AI for math reduces capability for doing math. Using AI to formulate opinions reduces capability to formulate opinions. Using AI to write summaries reduces capability to summarize. And so on. And, by nature, less capability means less agency.

Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them

Not to mention utilizing AI for control, spying, invigilation and coercion. Do I need to explain how control is opposed to agency?

Re: The L in "LLM" Stands for Lying

#267

Post by mikkupikku »

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

If you haven't heard of the modern roguelike genre you've probably been living under a rock, it seems like every other game these days at least calls itself such. Usually the resemblance to Rogue is so remote that it strains the meaning of the term, but procedural generation of levels is almost universal in this loosely defined genre.

Elite is a bit more obscure, but really anybody who aims to be familiar with the history of games should recognize the name at least. Metroidvania isn't a game, but is a combination of the names of Metroid and Castlevania and you absolutely should know about both of those.

Powermonger is new to me.

And while the comment in question didn't mention it, others have: Minecraft. If you're not familiar with Minecraft you must be Rip Van Winkle. This should be the foremost game that comes to mind when anybody talks about procedural generation.

Re: The L in "LLM" Stands for Lying

#269

Post by wolvesechoes »

phyzix5761 wrote: post #254
wolvesechoes wrote: post #155

I am bit tired of such discussions. I don't care if LLMs are good at coding or bad at it (in my experience the answer is "it depends"). I don't care how good are they at anything else. What matters in the end is that this tech is not to empower a common person (although it could). It is not here to make our lives better, more worthwhile, more satisfying (it could do these as well). It is there to reduce our agency, t…

At some point, if most people lose their jobs, you have no market to sell your services to. So, either, new jobs have to be created in order to keep the capitalism machine running, or you have to provide for the needs of every human being from whatever you're doing with your AI. Otherwise, a lot of hungry people revolt and you have violence against these businesses. I think new jobs will be created because AI is alwa…

> Otherwise, a lot of hungry people revolt and you have violence against these businesses.

With shrinking and aging population?

Re: The L in "LLM" Stands for Lying

#270

Post by bavell »

mejutoco wrote: post #218
theshrike79 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue isn't objective quality or realism, it's sticking to a specific style consistently. _Everyone_ (and their grandmother) can instantly tell a ChatGPT generated image, it has a very distinct style - and in my experience no amount of prompting will make it go away. Same for Grok and to a smaller degree Google's stuff. What the industry needs (and uses) is something they can feed a, say, wall texture into and th…

I think txt2img and img2img are terms to find those uses.

And comfyUI workflows. People have been doing this for awhile now.
Post reply on HN