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

The Wait Equation and AI Investment

javednissar.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–37 of 37 posts

Re: The Wait Equation and AI Investment

#31

Post by tsunamifury »

dustingetz wrote: post #25
tsunamifury wrote: post #3

This completely misses the concept that the technology doesn’t just create itself without investment. SOMEONE has to invest for that progress to be made. It’s why I always hated the application of this to tech.

someone ELSE

This is the problem with predatory game theory. Yes it’s “smarter” but it requires people to take the loss and get eaten for the “smarter” players to smugly claim victory. And if everyone acted like them nothing would work.

I hate it and I hate the arrogance of essays like this. They dive deeply into entirely missing the point.

Re: The Wait Equation and AI Investment

#32

Post by skywhopper »

What I find interesting about this are the things the specific example leaves out. Many engineers consider code reviews a real drag, but they aren't just busywork or wasted time or compliance checkboxes. Done well, they are a learning tool, a teaching opportunity, and a form of communication between engineers working in different areas of the code at different skill levels and knowledge levels. All of those things have value and add to team productivity in the long term. The "cost" in terms of hours spent doing code reviews is not wasted. But if you turn that job over to AI (even if you could), you lose almost all the benefits, adding a drag on your future productivity as knowledge gaps grow and communication declines.

On the other hand, if you're doing code review poorly, and it's just a waste of everyone's time, then you're far better off just dropping them altogether than spending money on an AI system to do poor code reviews for you.

Re: The Wait Equation and AI Investment

#33

Post by oliveshell »

tsunamifury wrote: post #29
Terr_ wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By that logic, somebody was so desperate to get convenient warm food that they decided to "invest" for decades in side-projects like airplanes and bombs just to finally get a microwave-oven, obviously true purpose of everything that came before. Just because something else in civilization might somehow help someday isn't enough to make it part of "the investment" which a company or individual is deciding whether to m…

Sorry but I feel like you are trying to be clever here but failing entirely because yes that is how it works. Continuous investment yields unexpected outcomes is like the core tenet.

Dude, the core tenet of this forum is making a good-faith [1] effort to really understand the fantastically complex issues at play here, and then to communicate about them honestly in a collaborative, rather than competitive, spirit.

You are not doing that.

[1]: https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/2020-07/Good_Faith...

Re: The Wait Equation and AI Investment

#34

Post by [deleted] »

oliveshell wrote: post #33
tsunamifury wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry but I feel like you are trying to be clever here but failing entirely because yes that is how it works. Continuous investment yields unexpected outcomes is like the core tenet.

Dude, the core tenet of this forum is making a good-faith [1] effort to really understand the fantastically complex issues at play here, and then to communicate about them honestly in a collaborative, rather than competitive, spirit. You are not doing that. [1]: https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/2020-07/Good_Faith...

[deleted]

Re: The Wait Equation and AI Investment

#35

Post by tsunamifury »

oliveshell wrote: post #33
tsunamifury wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry but I feel like you are trying to be clever here but failing entirely because yes that is how it works. Continuous investment yields unexpected outcomes is like the core tenet.

Dude, the core tenet of this forum is making a good-faith [1] effort to really understand the fantastically complex issues at play here, and then to communicate about them honestly in a collaborative, rather than competitive, spirit. You are not doing that. [1]: https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/2020-07/Good_Faith...

Dude…

Re: The Wait Equation and AI Investment

#36

Post by oliveshell »

tsunamifury wrote: post #35
oliveshell wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude, the core tenet of this forum is making a good-faith [1] effort to really understand the fantastically complex issues at play here, and then to communicate about them honestly in a collaborative, rather than competitive, spirit. You are not doing that. [1]: https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/2020-07/Good_Faith...

Dude…

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

^ Go read the comment guidelines. Really read them.

I dare you (rhetorically, not really: I won't read any further replies from you so save your breath) to then assert with a straight face that you've been paying even a lick of heed to a single one of them.

With this in mind, I am unwilling to engage with you further on the matter-- but I will say in closing that I genuinely hope that you may someday find true peace and self-acceptance.

I don't mean this flippantly: you'll truly be lots happier if you can eventually let go of the compulsive need to "win" every argument or exchange and learn to actually listen to others with an open mind.

Where's dang at?

Re: The Wait Equation and AI Investment

#37

Post by tsunamifury »

oliveshell wrote: post #36
tsunamifury wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude…

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html ^ Go read the comment guidelines. Really read them. I dare you (rhetorically, not really: I won't read any further replies from you so save your breath) to then assert with a straight face that you've been paying even a lick of heed to a single one of them. With this in mind, I am unwilling to engage with you further on the matter-- but I will say in closing that I gen…

:eyeroll:
Post reply on HN