391–400 of 663 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ctrl-F 'lines', 0 results Ctrl-F 'code', 0 results What is this comment about?
Maybe it was edited. I count at least 6 instances of the word “code”
It's a confusing comment. I misinterpreted it myself too originally.
> A system that costs less, per word thought or written, than it'd cost to hire the cheapest human labor on the face of the planet. Is it really possible to make this claim given the vast sums of money that have gone in to AI/LLM training?
> A system that costs less, per word thought or written, than it'd cost to hire the cheapest human labor on the face of the planet. Is it really possible to make this claim given the vast sums of money that have gone in to AI/LLM training?
Early factories were expensive, too (compared to the price of a horse), but that was never a show-stopper.
I think my software engineering job will be safe so long as big companies keep using average code as their training set. This is because the average developer creates unnecessary complexity which creates more work for me. The way the average dev structures their code requires like 10x the number of lines as I do and at least 10x the amount of time to maintain... The interest on technical debt compounds like interest…
Unnecessary complexity isn’t much of a problem when the code is virtually free to maintain or throw away and replace.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah I feel like the real ah ha moment is still coming once there is a GPT-like thing that has been trained on reality, not its shadow.
Reality cannot be perceived. A crisp shadow is all you can hope for. The problem for me is the point of the economy in the limit where robots are better, faster and cheaper than any human at any job. If the robots don’t decide we’re worth keeping around we might end up worse than horses.
Someone who makes horseshoes then learns how to make carburetors, because the demand is 10x. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox
Person whose job it is to sell AI selling AI is what I got from this post.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think, like the Bill Gates haters who interpret him talking about reducing the rate of birth in Africa as wanting to kill Africans, you're interpreting it wrong. The graph says horse ownership per person. People probably stopped buying horses, they let theirs retire (well, to be honest, probably also sent to the glue factory), and when they stopped buying new horses, horse breeding programs slowed down.
I don’t think you’re realizing that the OP understands this, and that in this analogy, the horses are human beings
and even if AI becomes good enough to replace most humans the economic surplus does not disappear
it's a coordination problem
in many places on Earth social safety nets are pretty robust, and if AI helps to reduce cost of providing basic services then it won't be a problem to expand those safety nets
...
there's already a pretty serious anti-inequality (or at least anti-billionaire) storm brewing, the question is can it motivate the necessary structural changes or just fuels yet another dumb populist movement
An engine performs a simple mechanical operation. Chess is a closed domain. An AI that could fully automate the job of these new hires, rather than doing RAG over a knowledge base to help onboard them, would have to be far more general than either an engine or a chessbot. This generality used to be foregrounded by the term "AGI." But six months to a year ago when the rate of change in LLMs slowed down, and those exci…
I think a lot about how much we altered our environment to suit cars. They're not a perfect solution to transport, but they've been so useful we've built tons more road to accommodate them. So, while I don't think AGI will happen any time soon, I wonder what 'roads' we'll build to squeeze the most out of our current AI. Probably tons of power generation.
What would that look like for navigating life without AI? Living in a community similar to the Amish or Hasidic Jews that don't integrate technology in their lives as much as the average person does? That's a much more extreme lifestyle change than moving to NYC to get away from cars.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unnecessary complexity isn’t much of a problem when the code is virtually free to maintain or throw away and replace.
Depends on the size and complexity of the problem that the system is solving. For very complex problems, even the most succinct solution will be complex and not all parts of the code can be throwaway code. You have to start stacking the layers of abstractions and some code becomes critical. Like think of the Linux Kernel, you can't throw away the Linux Kernel. You can't throw away Chromium or the V8 engine... Million…