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

Please Use AI

shawnsmucker.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 414 posts

Re: Please Use AI

#331

Post by happytoexplain »

Brendinooo wrote: post #327
graemep wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This makes me think about that "Dad, how do I?" YouTube channel that made headlines a few years back. People seem to be fine with such a thing existing, they don't seem to be lamenting that people might go to that channel instead of asking their own fathers. Not everyone has a father to ask. His own family were abandoned by their father when he was 14 and his sister was 9. People die. Some people have abusive or ne…

Yup, this meshes very well with the point I was trying to make.

It demonstrates a gap in your analogy. The author is writing about scenarios in which the theoretical subject has people in their life who should be valued. You can say, "and what if I don't know anybody who cooks food or fly-fishes?", and that would be a valid question in a void, but a dishonest interpretation of the author's writing.

Re: Please Use AI

#332

Post by btilly »

runarberg wrote: post #286
the_af wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So do not let AI write your speeches. But do use it to push yourself harder. Isn't the point of the poem that you should, instead, ask a human? You'll get sidetracked and drawn into unrelated conversations, sure, but that's what it means to be human. Trying to optimize these distractions away means you deprive yourself from human interactions. And why optimize anyway, what's the end goal? That's my take from the po…

That was what I was thinking when the conversation went to Derek of Veritasium. This poem was centered around humanity and our shared experiences as humans. Derek is consistently obsessed with technology, and will center every conversation around how technology will enhance the human experience (by which he probably means capitalism to be honest). Taking the conversation to Derek of Veritasium feels like after having…

If that is what you think of Derek, then you really don't understand Derek.

The video that I linked to is over an hour on why new technologies never transform education. He has a number of videos that critique what capitalism has lead big industries to. For example he has one on Monsanto's war on farming, another on how forever chemicals are poisoning us, and a third on how short-sightedness on protecting the health of rubber trees could be an existential threat to civilization.

Your model of him says that he should have done none of those things. The fact that he did is strong evidence that you've got a cardboard cutout that you're using as a strawman. Because it's a convenient punching bag. And not because it matches a real human very well.

Re: Please Use AI

#333

Post by Brendinooo »

causal wrote: post #60
Brendinooo wrote: post #29

This makes me think about that "Dad, how do I?" YouTube channel that made headlines a few years back. People seem to be fine with such a thing existing, they don't seem to be lamenting that people might go to that channel instead of asking their own fathers. Like, apparently Mr. Smucker has a friend who's into fly fishing, and the time to talk to that person. Great! Good for him! If I do not have a friend who's into…

Eh, the poem doesn't suggest technology isn't ever useful. It's highlighting that the inefficiency of human relationship is a feature, not a bug. You might not have a friend who is into fly-fishing, but surely you know somebody into SOMETHING you could ask about. Maybe that's less efficient, maybe it's less direct. But our whole reason for existing, all of the stuff that gives life meaning- it requires each other, an…

I generally agree with this, for what it's worth, and I'm certainly open to the accusation of missing the point entirely, but it certainly does seem to me like the author has a point of view on LLMs and wrote with an emotionally charged point of view.

Re: Please Use AI

#334

Post by willguest »

CivBase wrote: post #42
willguest wrote: post #18

I really love it when people put spirit into a piece of writing that, thanks to an algorithm (that's another name for AI, by the way) suggests it to me on HN. I am pleased that I can share musical discoveries with friends that were recommended by an AI, or make them laugh with some absurd image that fell out of Dall-E. I am happy that, with the help of an AI, i can make a news reader that is full of bright patterns,…

> thanks to an algorithm (that's another name for AI, by the way) suggests it to me on HN. It's a pretty big stretch to liken a ranking algorithm based entirely on direct, intentional human inputs to what most people understand to be "AI".

> what most people understand to be "AI"

most people understand it to be an LLM, but that doesn't make the term mean only that. the point was illustrative, perhaps Meta's attention maximization algos would be a better example

my point was not that they are the same, but that the author seems to advocate for some technologies, like video calling and text messages, but cannot make the leap to see that it is how we use that matters. It is a selective diabtribe, framed in a positive voice, hence my counter-examples to match

Re: Please Use AI

#335

Post by willguest »

jamwil wrote: post #38
willguest wrote: post #18

I really love it when people put spirit into a piece of writing that, thanks to an algorithm (that's another name for AI, by the way) suggests it to me on HN. I am pleased that I can share musical discoveries with friends that were recommended by an AI, or make them laugh with some absurd image that fell out of Dall-E. I am happy that, with the help of an AI, i can make a news reader that is full of bright patterns,…

The author’s point was more nuanced than ‘tool bad’.

tell me, where in this piece is there any acknowledgement that the technology, if used well, can bring people together?

show me, and i will accept there is nuance

Re: Please Use AI

#336

Post by mapontosevenths »

runarberg wrote: post #278
mapontosevenths wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, English is just another programming language. Some of us will always be better at it than others, and the ones that know other programming languages well will always have an advantage over those who do not. When you are good at it there can be craft in it still.

English is not a programming language though. I don’t understand how such an obviously false sentence can be so persistent.

I'm not even sure what you mean. Of course it is.

A programming language is a formal intermediate language for turning human comprehensible instructions into machine instructions by means of an interpreter or compiler. We've now allowed that intermediate language to be English, because that's preferable to most people, and the "compiler" has become very complicated indeed as a result of that.

You still have to be able to express what it is you want in a way the machine can understand, it's just both simpler and less deterministic now.

Re: Please Use AI

#337

Post by timmytokyo »

patates wrote: post #69

If AI is not that special, just a tool, then treat it as such. If AI is special, unlike any other tool, why aren't you using it that much? I personally don't think it's anything special, and if I knew I'll die soon and were planning my last trip with my child, I'd use AI, just like I'd use a credit card, or my phone. It allows me to spend more time with other people, getting boring tasks done much quicker.

And will you use AI to write the wedding speech you give at your child's wedding?

People aren't reading what they're responding to.

Re: Please Use AI

#339

Post by lanfeust6 »

btilly wrote: post #329
lanfeust6 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> instead of Citation needed. People did not stop talking to family, friends and colleagues just because they're able to leverage LLMs.

Not everyone did. But many now talk less. Why? AI psychosis is real. People who talk to LLMs too much, get used to them sucking up. Real humans feel jarring after that. (Just like people who get used to being in echo chambers, stop wanting to interact outside of those echo chambers.) After someone has an answer from an LLM, often that replaces reasons we would have talked to others. (See the OP for examples.)

I've yet to see anything substantiating these anecdotes.

Re: Please Use AI

#340

Post by btilly »

the_af wrote: post #158
btilly wrote: post #85

I am reminded of Veritasium: What Everyone Gets Wrong About AI and Learning (original video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xS68sl2D70 ) from a year ago. "The world is full of heavy things, and yet most of us aren't ripped." AI is an opportunity. On the one hand, it can be used to let our minds and social lives atrophy. On the other hand, it is an opportunity to help our minds grow. Most people will make the lazy ch…

> So do not let AI write your speeches. But do use it to push yourself harder. Isn't the point of the poem that you should, instead, ask a human? You'll get sidetracked and drawn into unrelated conversations, sure, but that's what it means to be human. Trying to optimize these distractions away means you deprive yourself from human interactions. And why optimize anyway, what's the end goal? That's my take from the po…

The AI is available when humans aren't. We should not reduce how much we talk to humans. But we should not avoid using AI where it makes sense.

As for why optimize, we should each decide what we care about, then optimize for that. I have personal reasons why I want to be a better speaker. Why I want to be able to stand in front of people, and have them connect with things that I care about. So it likely makes more sense for me to optimize building that skill, than for most.

You probably want to optimize on something else.

Post reply on HN