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

This time is different

shkspr.mobi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 400 posts

Re: This time is different

#331

Post by generallyjosh »

qsera wrote: post #280
libraryofbabel wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d rather talk about the history of steam engines than AI today, so: let’s just say it sounds like at some time in the past you saw a clunky inefficient Newcomen steam engine pumping water out of a coal mine, and you hated it, and now you think that’s all steam engines are or can be or can do: they’re loud and annoying and they’re just for pumping coal mines. Then one day someone tells you they’re powering mechanize…

No no, an intelligent person looking at a crude steam engine could see what potential it has. This is not hindsight. It is generating large amount of power on demand. From that one can imagine what it could do. But more importantly in this context, one could also imagine what it could NEVER do. If someone say "Oh, the mighty steam engine! It lets us print 100x more books than we were doing before. Who knows, may be s…

There are lots of intelligent people looking at AI and imagining its potential

Are you just saying that you're more intelligent than them? You can see clearly, where all the steam engine technicians can't?

Re: This time is different

#332

Post by generallyjosh »

wasmitnetzen wrote: post #289
rogerrogerr wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This argument is the one that shook me, I’m curious if you think there’s any merit to it: Humans have essentially three traits we can use to create value: we can do stuff in the physical world through strength and dexterity, and we can use our brains to do creative, knowledge, or otherwise “intelligent” work. (Note by “dexterity” I mean “things that humans are better at than physical robots because of our shape and n…

Life, uuuuh, finds a way. This ignores that the forces of capitalism, the labor market, value, etc are all made up. They work because people (are made to) believe in them. As soon as people stop believing in them, everything will fall apart. The whole point of an economy is to care for people. It will adapt to continue doing that. Yes, the changeover period might be extremely painful for a lot of people.

The whole point of an economy is to generate value. Very, very different than caring for people

Feudalism was the dominant economic system for millennia. The point is to extract value for the upper class. Peasants only matter as a source of labor, and they only get 'cared for' to the extent of keeping them alive and working.

Now think about what feudalism might look like if the peasants' labor could be automated

Re: This time is different

#333

Post by wasmitnetzen »

generallyjosh wrote: post #332
wasmitnetzen wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Life, uuuuh, finds a way. This ignores that the forces of capitalism, the labor market, value, etc are all made up. They work because people (are made to) believe in them. As soon as people stop believing in them, everything will fall apart. The whole point of an economy is to care for people. It will adapt to continue doing that. Yes, the changeover period might be extremely painful for a lot of people.

The whole point of an economy is to generate value. Very, very different than caring for people Feudalism was the dominant economic system for millennia. The point is to extract value for the upper class. Peasants only matter as a source of labor, and they only get 'cared for' to the extent of keeping them alive and working. Now think about what feudalism might look like if the peasants' labor could be automated

Well, yeah, "keeping alive" sounds like caring to me. Not to a great standard, that's how we got numerous revolutions, and feudalism did end eventually. People stopped believing it, and some kings lost their heads.

Re: This time is different

#334

Post by generallyjosh »

qsera wrote: post #271
keeda wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you look closer into history -- or ask your favorite AI to summarize ;-) -- about what new jobs were created when existing jobs were replaced by automation, the answer is broadly the same every time: the newer jobs required higher-level a) cognitive, b) technical or c) social skills. That is it. There is no other dimension to upskill along. (Would actually be relieved if someone can find counter-examples!) LLMs ar…

LLM's are just a better search tool. Nothing more.

You say this as though it's a pithy point.

Might as well say humans are just a better search tool - it's true in the exact same sense you're using.

All humans do is absorb information, then search through our memories and apply that information in relevant contexts to affect the world

Re: This time is different

#335

Post by generallyjosh »

imtringued wrote: post #302
massysett wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and despite every single one of these world-changing inventions, people in rich countries still go to work every day, even though UBI is generally not a thing. People claim AI will eliminate large numbers of jobs. Maybe it will, just like the tractor did. But new jobs are created. I would never have guessed that “influencer” would be a thing! This current “AI will destroy all the jobs and make most people useles…

The "AI will destroy all the jobs" narrative also has one obvious problem from an economics perspective, which is being obscured by tribalism and egocentrism. When presented with a zero sum game, the desire of the average human isn't to change the game so that everyone can get zero. It's to be the winner and for someone else to be the loser. If AGI every comes into existence, I'm not even sure it would have this bias…

I think what most people are worried about is that, as you say, AGI won't necessarily have our biases/biological drives

That might also mean it has no drive for self-determination. It might just be perfectly happy to do whatever humans tell it to, even if it's far smarter than us (and, this is exactly the sort of AI people are trying to make)

So, superintelligence winds up doing whatever a very small group of controlling humans say. And, like you say, humans want to win

Re: This time is different

#336

Post by graemep »

senko wrote: post #164
graemep wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No-one thought the internet was a failed technology in 2006. It was a vital tool by then. Handheld computers were an expanding market, dominated by Blackberry. EVs were an immature technology but hybrids like the Prius were selling.

You may remember this video featuring Facebook with a ridiculously high $15B valuation, Skype, YouTube and other failures: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I6IQ_FOCE6I

No, never seen it. Why would I?

There is a huge difference between claiming that there is an investment bubble in an industry and some companies are overvalued and that the technology is a failure. Someone might well think that Tesla is very overvalued, but that EVs are successful. If someone thinks there is a house price bubble that does not mean that they think houses are a failed technology.

Re: This time is different

#337

Post by brigandish »

tipperjones wrote: post #240
rogerrogerr wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This argument is the one that shook me, I’m curious if you think there’s any merit to it: Humans have essentially three traits we can use to create value: we can do stuff in the physical world through strength and dexterity, and we can use our brains to do creative, knowledge, or otherwise “intelligent” work. (Note by “dexterity” I mean “things that humans are better at than physical robots because of our shape and n…

You said there are three traits, but seems like you only listed two - unless you're counting strength and dexterity as separate and just worded it weirdly.

AI will improve people’s understanding of the Oxford comma.

Re: This time is different

#338

Post by Cthulhu_ »

jodrellblank wrote: post #329
massysett wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all, I fully appreciate that these inventions transformed life. I’m skeptical because so much of the breathless AI chatter claims AI will eclipse all these inventions. It is the breathless AI commentators, not I, who have lost all perspective on the magnitude and sweep of history.

You think an artificial intelligence would have less impact on the world than the steam engine? The AI commentators are not saying that ELIZA will change the world, they’re saying that one of the big companies is moments away from an AGI. Sam Altman called a recent ChatGPT model a “PhD level expert”; wouldn’t infinite PhDs for $20/month or $200/month be transformative? That is, your objection isn’t the usual “LLMs ar…

There's potential there (with the pocket-PhDs), the question is whether it'll actually make a measurable difference in the long run. I mean I'm sure it will make a difference, the question is whether it's what they say it will be, and whether it'll be financially viable. At the current burn rate of the AI companies, it isn't - before long the first ones will have to give up. They won't die, they'll be subsumed into their competitors.

Anyway, the challenge is making a difference. Current-day LLMs can, for example, generate stories and books; one tweet said "this can generate 1000 screenplays a day". Which sounds impressive by the numbers, but books, screenplays, etc were never about volume.

Same with PhDs - is there a shortage of them? Does adding potentially infinite PhDs (whatever they are) to a project make it better, or does it just make... more?

This is the main difference with the industrial revolution - it, for example, introduced machines that turned 10 people jobs into 1 person jobs. I don't think LLMs will do something like that, it'll just output 10 people's worth of Stuff that will need some use.

I don't think anyone ever asked for 1000 screenplays a day, or infinite PhD's for $20. But then, nobody asked for a riderless carriage yet here we are.

Re: This time is different

#339

Post by qsera »

generallyjosh wrote: post #334
qsera wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLM's are just a better search tool. Nothing more.

You say this as though it's a pithy point. Might as well say humans are just a better search tool - it's true in the exact same sense you're using. All humans do is absorb information, then search through our memories and apply that information in relevant contexts to affect the world

> pithy point.

Not really, because I do think all knowledge can be obtained by searching true randomness.

Re: This time is different

#340

Post by nancyminusone »

jodrellblank wrote: post #329
massysett wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all, I fully appreciate that these inventions transformed life. I’m skeptical because so much of the breathless AI chatter claims AI will eclipse all these inventions. It is the breathless AI commentators, not I, who have lost all perspective on the magnitude and sweep of history.

You think an artificial intelligence would have less impact on the world than the steam engine? The AI commentators are not saying that ELIZA will change the world, they’re saying that one of the big companies is moments away from an AGI. Sam Altman called a recent ChatGPT model a “PhD level expert”; wouldn’t infinite PhDs for $20/month or $200/month be transformative? That is, your objection isn’t the usual “LLMs ar…

>You think an artificial intelligence would have less impact on the world than the steam engine?

Not op, but yes, 100%. Steam backs nearly all development of technology of the last 150+ years. Where do you think the power come from to make things? More than half of the world's power *still* runs on steam, as will many of the systems running AI.

If steam power never existed, not only would you not exist but there's a good chance the country you live in wouldn't either. If you don't believe the effect is large, go to the farthest uncontacted place on earth and take out a CO2 meter.

Post reply on HN