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

The Rise of Whatever

eev.ee

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 537 posts

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#421

Post by dingnuts »

1718627440 wrote: post #419
raincole wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People will write lengthy and convoluted explanation on why LLM isn't like calculator or microwave oven or other technology before. (Like OP's article) But it really is. Humans have been looking for easier and lazier ways to do things since the dawn of civilization. Tech never ever prevents people who really want to hone their skills from doing so. World record of 100m sprint kept improving even since car was invente…

But you are not allowed to use either until you can already cook and calculate.

comparing LLMs to microwaves makes me think of the time my grandmother cooked the Thanksgiving turkey in a microwave because it was new and easy and the obvious thing to do!

I guess the analogy isn't that bad! I'd be pretty upset if a professional cook made my steak in a microwave.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#422

Post by bigstrat2003 »

eesmith wrote: post #349
fireflash38 wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slide rules were used in astronomy, engineering, and aviation. You could get them more accurate than 2 decimal places.

"A couple" does not always mean two. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/couple - "(informal) a small number" FWIW, "Maximum accuracy for standard linear slide rules is about three decimal significant digits" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slide_rule While yes, "Astronomical work also required precise computations, and, in 19th-century Germany, a steel slide rule about two meters long was used at one observatory. It had…

"a couple" always means two. "A few" always means three. That wiki is wrong.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#423

Post by globnomulous »

dingnuts wrote: post #420
globnomulous wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Music is actually a terrific counterexample to your point. It perfectly demonstrates the culturally and artistically destructive power of the steady march of progress in computer technology -- which really has led to fewer drummers. Far fewer people make their living as musicians than did even thirty years ago, and being a musician is no longer a viable middle-class career. Jaron Lanier, who has written on this, has…

> which really has led to fewer drummers. what's your basis for this claim? please provide some data showing number of drummers over time, or at least musicians, over the last fifty years or so. I tried searching and couldn't find anything but you're so confident, I'm sure you have a source you could link

Sure, here's a blog post that cites BLS statistics showing a 45% decline in the number of working musicians in the US just between 2002 and 2012: https://thetrichordist.com/2013/05/21/45-fewer-professional-...

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#424

Post by 1718627440 »

sfn42 wrote: post #378
kqr wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, do people generally use GPS routes to go places? I find GPS to be great to locate myself when I can't figure it out from landmarks, but I very rarely use it to select a route – I can just look at the map in the same app and figure out a route on my own.

I can't remember a whole route just from looking at the map once. Also maps generally don't show whether streets are one way and things like that. I just type the address into Google maps, or place a pin manually, then hit the start button. It'll tell me every step of the way. Keep right at the fork. In a hundred meters, turn left. Turn left. Take the second exit in the roundabout. Your destination is a hundred meter…

> Also maps generally don't show whether streets are one way and things like that.

Citation needed.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#425

Post by yieldcrv »

greyface- wrote: post #418
yieldcrv wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes, blocks are and were periodically empty if you expected applications to be deployed that would take up block space when used, and were going to build those applications yourself, then it was still rational in 2012 people were describing smart contracts, joint custody accounts to secure assets better, and many other applications that are commonplace and have their own critique and discussion now its like seeing an…

Today, when blocks are empty, you're paying 1 sat/vB. Back then, when blocks were empty, you paid zero. That's the difference between "all about blockspace" and "only about blockspace when you care about next-block latency". Here's a 2010 Satoshi post in a thread about transaction fees stating "we should always allow at least some free transactions": https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/posts/bitcointalk/thre... If…

and all I’m saying is that it didn’t matter for a bullish thesis whether this is just a nitpick fyi or a nuance you really care about

the only thing that mattered was the malleability of the system to meet its goal of attracting transactions, including the future malleability of what you are pointing out. blockspace became scarce. it was predictable that anything that undermined that would be excised out of the network.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#426

Post by doug_durham »

latexr wrote: post #345
doug_durham wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author mocks LLM enthusiasts, because they "dunk" on him. While writing an blog post that "dunks" on LLM enthusiasts. Total lack of awareness. If they had taken the time to read their blog before posting it, they might have avoided embarrassment.

> they might have avoided embarrassment. What embarrassment? This post, like plenty of Evelyn’s writing, reached the front page of HN and has a ton of commentary in agreement. Your comment, on the other hand, was downvoted to the bottom of the thread. The author also draws and publishes what is, in their own words, “pretty weird porn”. You should voice your disagreement with the contents of the post and explain what…

That is exactly what I did. My comment is exactly about the content. Did you actually read the blog post? I don't know why you are bringing up what the author draws. That irrelevant to the conversation.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#427

Post by rolandog »

zwnow wrote: post #340
erwincoumans wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. However, according to the author LLM's mostly produce crap, and he doesn't seem to be able to imagine (or want?) that to improve (beyond crap/hallucination and become very useful to many).

Tell me how is it going to be useful to the many? Even better marketing emails? More precise targeted advertising? Even more automated job application rejections? Mass firings due to AI replacing most office jobs? Whats the benefit of LLMs to the many who barely can operate a search machine? I am sorry but thinking this will benefit the many is delusional. It's main use is making rich people richer by saving expenses…

Exactly... Why is it that every time a science fiction writer comes up with a new dystopian future to warn humanity about something, there's always a bunch of psychopaths that go "ooh, blueprints for a get-rich-at-the-expense-of-everyone-else scheme!"?

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#428

Post by ineedasername »

raincole wrote: post #44
gyomu wrote: post #10

Broadly agreed with all the points outlined in there. But for me the biggest issue with all this — that I don't see covered in here, or maybe just a little bit in passing — is what all of this is doing to beginners, and the learning pipeline. > There are people I once respected who, apparently, don’t actually enjoy doing the thing. They would like to describe what they want and receive Whatever — some beige sludge th…

People will write lengthy and convoluted explanation on why LLM isn't like calculator or microwave oven or other technology before. (Like OP's article) But it really is. Humans have been looking for easier and lazier ways to do things since the dawn of civilization. Tech never ever prevents people who really want to hone their skills from doing so. World record of 100m sprint kept improving even since car was invente…

The jump from Assembly to Python is an enormous skill difference. But the shift from Python to Python with Copilot? Not as much, and every counter to this sort of comparison that I have heard is strongly in want of a true Scotsman.

It’s time to move on. The history of tech is a steady march of tools that demand less prep, less precision, and less friction from their users.

All this hand-wringing seems to show is that a worforce whose aggregate work ethos usually mocks “get off my lawn” attitudes in others was hiding a significant “but I never thought it would happen to me”, often couched in some variety of “but think of the children”.

Besides, it could be worse: it’s not like when other professions went obsolete practically overnight, like switchboard operators, or cuirassiers.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#429

Post by throwawayoldie »

ninetyninenine wrote: post #97
raincole wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People will write lengthy and convoluted explanation on why LLM isn't like calculator or microwave oven or other technology before. (Like OP's article) But it really is. Humans have been looking for easier and lazier ways to do things since the dawn of civilization. Tech never ever prevents people who really want to hone their skills from doing so. World record of 100m sprint kept improving even since car was invente…

>People will write lengthy and convoluted explanation on why LLM isn't like calculator or microwave oven or other technology before. (Like OP's article) But it really is. You generally don't need a lengthy explanation because it's common sense. When someone doesn't get it then people have to go into lengthy convoluted explanations because they are trying to elucidate common sense to someone who doesn't get it. I mean…

> The first thing is we don't understand it. It's a black box. We understand the learning algorithm that trains the weights, but we don't understand conceptually how an LLM works

Wrong.

> You are talking to a thing that understands what you say to it

Wrong.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#430

Post by Procrastes »

This captures something I've been struggling to describe, and "Whatever" is the perfect term for this.

Private Equity & Financialization: Whatever for business Flood the Zone & Deadcatting: "Whatever" for politics

It's what I think about when I hear all of the "AI is going to eliminate all the jobs." That's just a convenient cover story for "Tax laws changed so R&D isn't free money anymore, and we need to fire everyone."

When almost every drop of wealth is in the control of a tiny number of people, it's not surprising that the world turns into one big competition for ways to convince those people that you have a way for them to sop up the remaining thimbleful too.

Post reply on HN