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

I love LLMs, I hate hype

geohot.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 340 posts

Re: I love LLMs, I hate hype

#41

Post by nylonstrung »

jacobgold wrote: post #12

As soon as we started unironically calling LLMs "AI" we went down the hype path. That has plenty of downsides, like stressing out the entire world and attracting cryptocurrency bros, but also the major upside massive of funding/acceleration. So far, all we have is more software running on computers. It's powerful, and it's amazing, but it's not magic. Calling it "AI" was possibly a net-negative but we don't know yet.

I think calling it AI has been very negative.

One of the lesser, but still underdiscussed ramifications is that I think it has limited the public's ability to comprehend the Yann LeCunn argument, that genuine AI is likely possible but that LLMs and transformers are a dead end and we need to explore different modalities

Re: I love LLMs, I hate hype

#42

Post by EgregiousCube »

dom96 wrote: post #39

I love LLMs too, but I am concerned about their cost. They are all still very subsidised. Is there any guarantee that I'll be able to run a Opus 4.8-level model on my personal computer before the big AI labs decide to hike up the prices?

Guarantee is too strong a thing to seek, but healthy competition makes it highly likely that the supply/demand curve will meet at a healthy place.

You're always guaranteed that you can stash away the open models!

Re: I love LLMs, I hate hype

#43

Post by blauditore »

hamandcheese wrote: post #10

> where’s all this new magical software that the productivity improvements should imply? It's running, privately, in my homelab. I think we are entering what I call the "have it your way" era. If an open source project doesn't do exactly what you want it to do, fork it, or create a new version. It's too easy. This makes me a bit concerned about the future of open source. Upstreaming used to be worth it, since maintai…

You will likely end up in maintenance hell soon. This will likely not be much easier with AI because coding is not the hard/annoying part, it's the fact that you need to dust off every little project every time a tiny fix is needed, and that's a lot of toil in the long run.

Re: I love LLMs, I hate hype

#44

Post by hobofan »

atomicnumber3 wrote: post #21
hamandcheese wrote: post #10

> where’s all this new magical software that the productivity improvements should imply? It's running, privately, in my homelab. I think we are entering what I call the "have it your way" era. If an open source project doesn't do exactly what you want it to do, fork it, or create a new version. It's too easy. This makes me a bit concerned about the future of open source. Upstreaming used to be worth it, since maintai…

Remember: code is free as in "free puppy". FOSS communities were never valuable because of the code. It was the shared written and oral traditions that make the software useful, usable, and updated.

> that make the software useful, usable, and updated

There is a lot of OSS software out there (e.g. in scientific communities) that I would say would barely qualify for each of those three attributes. The main reason it's valuable for the respective communities, is because it's the only thing that's available.

Re: I love LLMs, I hate hype

#45

Post by nylonstrung »

HellDunkel wrote: post #9

How to you love this stuff so hard? I could newer love any ai generated music, book or artwork. Anything ai gemerated i have ever seem or heard was either disgustingly slop or indistinguishable from something else which was real. It‘s a like finding a cool track only to discover it‘s a lazy bootleg.

Yeah but it was only like 2 years ago that artists were arguing this on the basis that AI-gen images would consistently mangle hands

Now we're at a point where that never happens, and where lipsync is almost a completely solved problem

If the issue here is simply that the quality is bad, one has to contend with the fact that it is undoubtedly exponentially improving and there's no reason we should expect that improvement to stop

I also don't have any interest in consuming AI generated art, but the same criticisms were levied at computer graphics and if we're comparing to CGI we'd be at the late 1970s in terms of nascency

Re: I love LLMs, I hate hype

#46

Post by simianthoughts »

This guy is sooooo annoying with his stale takes.

This is what he wrote before.

> I’m calling it now, the adoption of AI agents into software development will be one of the most costly mistakes in the field’s history. Agents cannot program, and it’s taking longer and longer to realize that they can’t.

Now he's writng

> I love the progress. I’m so excited for the new LLMs, self driving cars, video generation models, and coding agents.

SMH now he writes about the hype. My brother in absolute Deity, *you* should have believed the hype.

Re: I love LLMs, I hate hype

#47

Post by vatsachak »

apsurd wrote: post #16
apsurd wrote: post #5

Your SF hate isn't a good look. There are many things to be critical about but shoehorning an entire metro into the echo-chamber you're supposedly beyond yet can't help but orient your entire world view as the anti-SF-tech-bro all while running a startup and discussing AI on HN. TLDR: SF is more than Paul Graham worship parties. EDIT: Think I'm being misunderstood! author goes out of his way to blame shitty San Franc…

damn, you all hate SF that much?

I don't hate SF it's just overpriced.

Whenever I visit SFO it's really funny seeing all the advertisements from startups above a population struggling to find housing.

Won't it be better to pay someone 100k in Reno than 180k in SF? Most collaboration happens online these days anyways.

Honestly 60k in Barcelona is like 200k in SF when you look at housing and public services.

We need to punish bad city governance for being bad.

Re: I love LLMs, I hate hype

#49

Post by talloaktrees »

dom96 wrote: post #39

I love LLMs too, but I am concerned about their cost. They are all still very subsidised. Is there any guarantee that I'll be able to run a Opus 4.8-level model on my personal computer before the big AI labs decide to hike up the prices?

Currently, because of the subsidies from the frontier models, demand is mostly for higher intelligence.

If subsidies do end, demand for price efficiency per unit of intelligence will go way up.And because there's many players in the market, this demand should be met by at least some of them.

Re: I love LLMs, I hate hype

#50

Post by Aurornis »

dom96 wrote: post #39

I love LLMs too, but I am concerned about their cost. They are all still very subsidised. Is there any guarantee that I'll be able to run a Opus 4.8-level model on my personal computer before the big AI labs decide to hike up the prices?

> They are all still very subsidised.

I think the opposite: I think the frontier labs have good margins on their inference unit costs.

We can already see what it costs to run near frontier-size models. There are independent business pivoting to serving these models at reasonable prices and they're competing on OpenRouter for costs much lower than frontier labs.

> Is there any guarantee that I'll be able to run a Opus 4.8-level model on my personal computer before the big AI labs decide to hike up the prices?

I would bet good money on prices going down significantly, not up.

If we get to the point where you can run an Opus 4.8 model on your local computer, it's going to be even cheaper for a datacenter to serve it on their hardware. That means prices crash, not that they're going to rise.

Post reply on HN