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

Artificial intelligence is losing hype

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 814 posts

Re: Artificial intelligence is losing hype

#401

Post by jonahx »

cleandreams wrote: post #398

The problem is that current generative AI is not actually intelligent. Yann LeCunn had a great tweet on this: Sometimes, the obvious must be studied so it can be asserted with full confidence: - LLMs can not answer questions whose answers are not in their training set in some form, - they can not solve problems they haven't been trained on, - they can not acquire new skills our knowledge without lots of human help, -…

"in some form" is doing a lot of work there.

The problem is that, by the standards of most human beings, they are in fact doing what we informally call "inference" or "creating new things".

That this is being accomplished by something that is "technically a fancy autocomplete" doesn't seem to matter practically... it's still doing all this useful and surprising stuff.

Re: Artificial intelligence is losing hype

#402

Post by Midnight1938 »

Calavar wrote: post #359
_acco wrote: post #207

AI (specifically Claude Sonnet via Cursor) has completely transformed my workflow. It's changed my job description as a programmer. (And I've been doing this for 13y – no greenhorn!) This wasn't the case with GPT-4/o. This capability is very new. When I spoke to a colleague at Microsoft about these changes, they were floored. Microsoft has made themselves synonymous with AI, yet their company is barely even leveragin…

I feel like I'm living in a different universe sometimes. The consensus on HN seems to be that you can be pretty productive with LLMs as coding assistants, but every time I try I find it borderline impossible to get functional code even for pretty straightforward prompts. I decided to fire up GPT-4o again today to see if maybe things have gotten better over the past few months. I asked GPT to write code to render a t…

It has helped, at the cost of making me more dependent on the assistants

Re: Artificial intelligence is losing hype

#403

Post by celestialcheese »

_acco wrote: post #207

AI (specifically Claude Sonnet via Cursor) has completely transformed my workflow. It's changed my job description as a programmer. (And I've been doing this for 13y – no greenhorn!) This wasn't the case with GPT-4/o. This capability is very new. When I spoke to a colleague at Microsoft about these changes, they were floored. Microsoft has made themselves synonymous with AI, yet their company is barely even leveragin…

100% this - Cursor's new inline multi-file editing with claude is staggeringly good. And it's _so_ new still.

Re: Artificial intelligence is losing hype

#404

Post by wsc981 »

Calavar wrote: post #359
_acco wrote: post #207

AI (specifically Claude Sonnet via Cursor) has completely transformed my workflow. It's changed my job description as a programmer. (And I've been doing this for 13y – no greenhorn!) This wasn't the case with GPT-4/o. This capability is very new. When I spoke to a colleague at Microsoft about these changes, they were floored. Microsoft has made themselves synonymous with AI, yet their company is barely even leveragin…

I feel like I'm living in a different universe sometimes. The consensus on HN seems to be that you can be pretty productive with LLMs as coding assistants, but every time I try I find it borderline impossible to get functional code even for pretty straightforward prompts. I decided to fire up GPT-4o again today to see if maybe things have gotten better over the past few months. I asked GPT to write code to render a t…

For LOVR (Lua based 3D/VR framework), I found these LLMs pretty much useless, both ChatGPT and Claude. Seems all is trained on old APIs, so it takes quite a bit of effort to make any suggestions work with newest LOVR version.

Re: Artificial intelligence is losing hype

#405

Post by coffeebeqn »

bartread wrote: post #311
sakopov wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think my general perception is that AI is a great assistant for some occupations like software engineering, but due to its large room for error it's very impractical for majority of business applications that require accuracy. I'm seeing this trend at my company, which operates in the medical field and recently mandated that all engineers use CoPilot. At the same time it's a struggle to see where we can improve our…

I've been using (GitHub) Copilot and ChatGPT since they've been widely available. I started using ChatGPT for coding after 4 came out. I was an early advocate for Copilot but, honestly, nowadays I really don't find it that useful, compared to GPT-4o via ChatGPT. ChatGPT not being directly integrated into my editor turns out to be an advantage. The problem with Copilot is it gets in the way. It's too easy to unintenti…

Copilot was surprisingly one of the worst AI products I’ve used. It keeps suggesting nonsense and the insertions it does in VSCode often mess up very basic things like it starts writing things in the wrong place (or adds a function inside another function) and the result doesn’t even compile. It also seems to have zero understanding of the codebase apart from maybe a few lines before and after. Incredible that this is being sold as a real product at this point

Re: Artificial intelligence is losing hype

#406

Post by potatoman22 »

smt88 wrote: post #372
anon291 wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that these problems will follow the same growth trajectory as every other tech bug. In other words, they will go away eventually. But the Rubicon is still crossed. There is a general purpose computer system that understands human language and can write real sounding human language. That's a sea change.

> will follow the same growth trajectory as every other tech bug What you're referring to isn't a bug. It's inherent to the way LLMs work. It can't "go away" in an LLM model because... > understands human language ...they don't. They are prediction machines. They don't "understand" anything.

What do you mean by understand?

Re: Artificial intelligence is losing hype

#407

Post by zone411 »

Calavar wrote: post #391
aschobel wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Give it another shot but with Claude Sonnet 3.5. It’s my daily driver for coding tasks. It seems especially strong with Python but a bit medium with Swift.

I just signed up for the free version. Claude Sonnet does properly use malloc/free to manage the buffer where GPT-4o screws up (Yay!) It manages to gets through the whole process of initializing a graphics device and grabbing a queue from the device. It took some questionable shortcuts to get there (and didn't leave any comments explaining those shortcuts and the problems they could cause down the road), but fine, th…

LLMs are much better at Python and JavaScript than at C/C++. This simple difference can account for much of the variation in people's experiences.

Re: Artificial intelligence is losing hype

#408

Post by mikhmha »

Calavar wrote: post #359
_acco wrote: post #207

AI (specifically Claude Sonnet via Cursor) has completely transformed my workflow. It's changed my job description as a programmer. (And I've been doing this for 13y – no greenhorn!) This wasn't the case with GPT-4/o. This capability is very new. When I spoke to a colleague at Microsoft about these changes, they were floored. Microsoft has made themselves synonymous with AI, yet their company is barely even leveragin…

I feel like I'm living in a different universe sometimes. The consensus on HN seems to be that you can be pretty productive with LLMs as coding assistants, but every time I try I find it borderline impossible to get functional code even for pretty straightforward prompts. I decided to fire up GPT-4o again today to see if maybe things have gotten better over the past few months. I asked GPT to write code to render a t…

I feel the exact same way. I have felt 0 need to use an LLM in my current workflow. If I could explain concisely what my problem is in English - then I would already know the answer. In that case why would I be asking AI the question. And I don't want opinionated answers to subjective questions. Why run that through a filter, I can investigate better myself through links on the internet.

By the way - I think AI or ML whatever has some valid uses right now. but mostly in image processing domain - so like recognizing shapes in some bounded domain OK yea. Generative image - NOT bad but theres always this "AI GLOW" to each image. Something is always off. Its some neat tools but a race to the bottom and mostly users want to generate explicit content lets be real. and they will become increasingly more creative and obtuse to get around the guards. nothing is stopping you from entering the * industry and making tons off money. but that industry is always doing good.

a friend recently suggested to use AI to generate generic icons for my game. Thats a really good use case. but does that radically change the current economy?

[BTW GENERIC STUFF ONLY UNTILL I could hire someone because i prefer that experience way more. you can get more interesting results. 4 eyes are better than 2.

Re: Artificial intelligence is losing hype

#409

Post by bufferoverflow »

skydhash wrote: post #343
bufferoverflow wrote: post #96

AI is not one thing at the moment. We have multiple systems that are being developed in parallel: • text generators • code generators • image generators • video generators • speech generators • sound/music generators • various robotics vision and control systems (often trained in virtual environments) • automated factories / warehouses / fulfillment centers • self-driving cars (trucks/planes/trains/boats/bikes/whatev…

> Self-driving was pretty bad a year ago The threshold for acceptable self-driving is genuine effort from the automated system to avoid accidents as we can't punish it for bad driving. And I want auditable proof of that. > Image generators now exceed 99.9% of humans in painting/drawing abilities. I'm pretty sure the amount of people that can draw is less than that. And they can beat image generators by a mile as thos…

> The threshold for acceptable self-driving is genuine effort from the automated system to avoid accidents as we can't punish it for bad driving. And I want auditable proof of that.

You can have any standard of safety that you want, that's absolutely your choice. Plenty of automated systems that your life depends on that you have never audited and never will. That includes elevators, cars, planes, all kinds of medical gear, etc.

My standard is simpler: whenever the AI is safer than the average human driver, it already saves lives.

> I'm pretty sure the amount of people that can draw is less than that.

You probably have some esoteric definition of "people that can draw". Anyone capable of holding a pen/pencil/brush can draw.

> And while there are bad communicators, I think lots of people are doing ok on that front

Look at the previous comment. Seems like you overestimated even your own communication skills :)

> Text generators can be perfect syntax-wise, but the intent has to come from someone.

I'm hoping that we will achieve the level of AI writing where you can prompt "write me an interesting sci-fi book", and it does. Not much intent here, much artificial intelligence required.

Re: Artificial intelligence is losing hype

#410

Post by stevenhuang »

greenthrow wrote: post #390
stevenhuang wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The tokens could be patterns of colored shapes with no actual meaning, only statistical distributions and nothing about how the LLMs work would change. I can put your brain in a vat and stimulate your sensory neurons with a statistical distribution with no actual meaning, and nothing about how your brain works would change either. The LLM and your brain would attempt to interpret meaning with referent from training…

Your response is nonsense. We don't know how consciousness arises from matter but we do have significant understandings about knowledge, reasoning, modeling, visualization, object permanence, etc. etc. that are significant parts of how the human mind works. And we know LLMs have none of these. The point of my colored shape example is that it is an illusion that there is anything resembling a mind inside an LLM. I tho…

> And we know LLMs have none of these.

Go ahead and cite your sources. For every study claiming that LLMs lack these qualities, there are others that support and reinforce the connectionist model of how knowledge is encoded, and with other parallels to the human brain. So... it's inconclusive. It's bizarre why you so strongly insist otherwise when it's clear you are not informed.

> The point of my colored shape example is that it is an illusion that there is anything resembling a mind inside an LLM

And my example with subjecting a human brain through your procedure is to illustrate what a garbage experiment design it is. You wouldn't be able to tell there's a mind inside either. Both LLM and human brain mind would be confused. Both would "continue working" in the same way, trying to interpret meaning from meaningless stimulation.

So you don't have a point to make, got it.

Post reply on HN