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

The force-feeding of AI features on an unwilling public

honest-broker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 421 posts

Re: The force-feeding of AI features on an unwilling public

#311

Post by danaris »

famouswaffles wrote: post #284
relaxing wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US public opinion is negative on AI. It’s also negative on Google and Meta (the rest of the top 5.) No condescension necessary.

Saying something over and over again doesn't make it true. US Public Opinion is negative ? Really ? How do you figure that ?

It's the entire premise of the article. Supported by data within the article.

If you have evidence to the contrary, it seems to me the burden of proof lies on you to show it. "People frequently visit this one site that's currently talked about a lot" is not evidence that people are in favor of AI.

Re: The force-feeding of AI features on an unwilling public

#312

Post by [deleted] »

LgLasagnaModel wrote: post #239
alganet wrote: post #233

The major issue with AI technology is the people. The enthusiasts that pretend issues don't exist, the cheap startups trying to sell snake oil. The AI community treats potential customers as invaders. If you report a problem, the entire thing turns on you trying to convince you that you're wrong, or that you reported a problem because you hate the technology. It's pathetic. It looks like a viper's nest. Who would wan…

Good point. Also, the fact that I’m adamant that one cannot fly a helicopter to the moon doesn’t mean that I think helicopters are useless. That said, if I’m inundated everyday with people insisting that one CAN fly a helicopter to the moon or that that capability is just around the corner, I might get so fed up that i say F it, I don’t want to hear another F’ing word about helicopters even though I know that helicop…

[deleted]

Re: The force-feeding of AI features on an unwilling public

#313

Post by handfuloflight »

const_cast wrote: post #307
handfuloflight wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This overlooks a new category of developer who operates in natural language, not in syntax.

Does this new category actually exist? Because, I would think, if you want to be successful at a real company you would need to know how to program.

Knowing how to program is not limited to knowing how to write syntax.

Re: The force-feeding of AI features on an unwilling public

#314

Post by famouswaffles »

danaris wrote: post #311
famouswaffles wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying something over and over again doesn't make it true. US Public Opinion is negative ? Really ? How do you figure that ?

It's the entire premise of the article. Supported by data within the article. If you have evidence to the contrary, it seems to me the burden of proof lies on you to show it. "People frequently visit this one site that's currently talked about a lot " is not evidence that people are in favor of AI.

>It's the entire premise of the article.

Yeah, and it's wrong.

>Supported by data within the article.

Really Nothing in that article supports a statement as strong as "US public opinion on AI is negative".

>"People frequently visit this one site that's currently talked about a lot" is not evidence that people are in favor of AI.

ChatGPT wasn't released last week. It's nearly 2 years old and it's growth has been steady. People aren't visiting the site that much because of some 15 minutes of fame, they're visiting it because they find use of it that frequently. You don't get that many weekly active users otherwise.

And yeah, if that many people use it that frequently then you're going to need real evidence to say that they have a poor opinion on it, not tangentially related random surveys.

Oh the survey said most people wouldn't pay money for features they currently get for free ? Come on.

I agree that features you don't want shouldn't be shoved down your throat. I genuinely do. But that's about the only thing in the article I agree with.

Re: The force-feeding of AI features on an unwilling public

#315

Post by DangitBobby »

croes wrote: post #235
satyrun wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My 75 year old father uses Claude instead of google now for basically any search function. All the anti-AI people I know are in their 30s. I think there are many in this age group that got use to nothing changing and are wishing it to stay that way.

Isn’t it fascinating how all of a sudden we swap energy saving and data protection for convenience. We won’t solve climate change but we will have elaborate essays why we failed.

I think for the majority of the population, solving climate change is a non-goal. Even people who ostensibly care about it aren't willing to sacrifice anything for it.

Re: The force-feeding of AI features on an unwilling public

#316

Post by const_cast »

handfuloflight wrote: post #313
const_cast wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does this new category actually exist? Because, I would think, if you want to be successful at a real company you would need to know how to program.

Knowing how to program is not limited to knowing how to write syntax.

Yes, but knowing how to read and write syntax is a required pre-requisite.

Syntax, even before LLMs, is just an implementation detail. It's for computers to understand. Semantics is what humans care about.

Re: The force-feeding of AI features on an unwilling public

#317

Post by handfuloflight »

const_cast wrote: post #316
handfuloflight wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Knowing how to program is not limited to knowing how to write syntax.

Yes, but knowing how to read and write syntax is a required pre-requisite. Syntax, even before LLMs, is just an implementation detail. It's for computers to understand. Semantics is what humans care about.

*Was* a required pre-requisite. Natural language can be translated bidirectionally with any programming syntax.

And so if syntax is just an implementation detail and semantics is what matters, then someone who understands the semantics but uses AI to handle the syntax implementation is still programming.

Re: The force-feeding of AI features on an unwilling public

#318

Post by DangitBobby »

kesor wrote: post #127

Companies didn't ask your opinion when they offshore manufacturing to Asia. They didn't ask your opinion when they offshore support to call centers in Asia. Companies don't ask your opinion, they do what they think is best for their financial interest, and that is how capitalism works. Once upon a time, not too long ago, there was someone who would bag your groceries, and someone who would clean your window at the ga…

It's funny how we can see the same symptoms but come to opposite conclusion on the causes and solutions.

Re: The force-feeding of AI features on an unwilling public

#319

Post by alganet »

benreesman wrote: post #291
alganet wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's an unholy chimera. As militant as GNU, as greedy as Microsoft, as viral as fidget spinners. The worst aspects of each of those communities. Actual promising AI tech doesn't even get the center stage, it doesn't get a chance to do it.

I was talking to a buddy earlier and realized in a conscious way something I suppose I knew but hadn't thought about deeply. As godawful as this brute force, "change the laws because China!", 24x7 assault of LLM hypelords has been (and I love GP's analogy about finding a helicopter useful), and its been preeeeety unpleasant, there is a silver lining. The compute and tooling needed for all the other under-explored, ni…

You can't buy friends giving away discounts.

Re: The force-feeding of AI features on an unwilling public

#320

Post by goatlover »

handfuloflight wrote: post #221
goatlover wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So they don't understand the syntax being generated for them?

They don't need to, any more than syntax writers need to understand byte code. They need to understand what the code does.

I have a hard time believing any of these natural language only prompters are being hired as developers if they don't understand the syntax. Part of the issue is LLMs are indeterministic and hallucinate. They also don't recognize every bug they generate.
Post reply on HN