Live data from Hacker News

Is it a bubble?

oaktreecapital.com

451–460 of 605 posts

Re: Is it a bubble?

#451
post #446
post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The stats are something like 1 in 10 people experience domestic violence. Unless someone takes a vow of silence and goes to live in the wilderness there is no way to avoid awful people. They're just people. The average standard is not high. Although I suppose an argument could be made that wife-beaters are actually just evil rather than being low-empathy but I think the point is still clear enough.

I don't know why you picked that particular example to make your point. I do notice though that you framed it in a pretty sexist way. You realize the dark figure of men getting abused by their wives is higher then the media reports? In any case, my point is, violence in relationships happens both ways. Why that confirms that humans are in general not capable of being empathy is beyond me. My point still stands. You c…

> You realize the dark figure of men getting abused by their wives is higher then the media reports? In any case, my point is, violence in relationships happens both ways.

Yes. That is in fact pretty much exactly what I'm arguing. People are often horrible.

> BUT, you definitely can make sure you surround yourself with decent people...

People generally can't. Otherwise there'd be a bunch more noticeable social stratification to isolate abusive spouses instead of it being politely ignored. And if people could, you would - you note in the next sentence that you can't being dealt with in an inappropriate way.

And you aren't even trying to identify people who are generally low empathy, you're just trying to find people who don't treat you badly.

> me the frustrated kind of person you seem to be.

The irony in a thread on empathy. What frustration? Being an enthusiastic human-observer isn't usually frustrating. Some days I suppose. But that sort of guess is the type of thing that AIs don't tend to do - they typically do focus rather carefully on the actual words used and ideas being expressed.

Re: Is it a bubble?

#452
post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does AI assisted shopping create more economic activity? Even assuming you can do it, and people do find it helpful, it likely just shifts who people buy from, not how much?

How did Amazon.com create more economic activity? Same way. It just has to make it more efficient.

Amazon.com is a business. AI is a technology in of itself it isn't a business.

Thus far it appears applications of AI that provide 'benefit' do so by removing or reducing the need for human operators. Examples include: fewer software engineers, fewer call centres, removing potentially whole areas of work such as paralegals and in general automating away many white collar jobs.

By far the largest use case of AI is this.

Re: Is it a bubble?

#453
There is $8 trillion said to be earmarked to build 100 AI data centers[1]. At 10% hurdle rate, the industry will have to generate $800 billion a year to pay it off, while GPUs are replaced every three years by faster chips.

If you watch Ilyas recent interview, “it’s very hard to discuss AGI, because no one knows how to build it yet[2]”.

[1] https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ibm-ceo-says-no-way-103010877... [2] https://youtu.be/aR20FWCCjAs?si=DEoo4WQ4PXklb-QZ

Re: Is it a bubble?

#454
post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you should consider carefully whether AI is actually better at these things (especially any one given model at all of them), or if your ability to judge quality in these areas is flawed/limited.

So? Do I not count as a benchmark of basic intelligent now? I've got a bunch of tests and whatnot that suggest I'm a reasonably above average at thinking. There is this fascinating trend where people would rather bump humans out of the naturally intelligent category rather than admit AIs are actually already at an AGI standard. If we're looking for intelligent conversation AI is definitely above average. Above-averag…

A lot of people who are also above average according to a bunch of tests disagree with you. Even if we take 'above average' on some tests to mean in every area--above average at literacy, above average at music, above average at empathy--it's still clear that many people have higher standards for these things than you. I'm not saying definitively that this means your standards are unreasonably easy to meet, but I do think it's important to think about it, rather than just assume that--because it impresses you--it must be impressive in general.

When AI surprises any one of us, it's a good idea to consider whether 'better than me at X' is the same as 'better than the average human at X', or even 'good at X'.

Re: Is it a bubble?

#455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't you just prompt a way to AGI without spending all that money?

Honestly this is the best response. If the AI was actually so great, it could create better AI, and the future would already be here

According to the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy this would take an AI 10 million years.

Seems like we're stuck with '42' for a while ;)

Re: Is it a bubble?

#456
post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they are better at empathy and conversation than most Imagine the conversations this guy must have with people IRL lol

Do you not talk to ordinary people? They are not intelligent conversationalists. They tend to be more of the "lol" variety.

I think you might be into something. I'm getting serious "lol" vibes from your comment.

Re: Is it a bubble?

#457
post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If a compiler counts as AI then so does literally every other program out there (at least the ones with well-defined inputs and outputs). You seem to be missing some context. We were talking about a system that takes a typed description of what you want as input and outputs code. There is plenty of software, even with well-defined inputs and outputs, which do not do that. But there is a particular type of software…

>We were talking about a system that takes a typed description of what you want as input and outputs code. There is plenty of software, even with well-defined inputs and outputs, which do not do that. You are trying to assert an equivalence between compilers and AI systems that simply does not exist. Sure, you could abuse the English language to try to elevate "vibecoding" to the level of "software engineering", and…

> You are trying to assert an equivalence between compilers and AI systems that simply does not exist.

The equivalence is between typing out what you want and having a machine produce code from that and compilers. Call that "AI systems" instead of "compilers" if you want, but "AI systems" lacks precision, so I think we can eventually come to agree that compiler is more precise. Even if we don't, it is what I chose to call it. Therefore, that's what it means in the context of my comments. That is how English works. I am surprised this is news to you.

> I'm done with this conversation.

I know you like silly semantic debates, so is talking past everyone really a conversation? The dictionary definition indicates that there needs to be an exchange, not just taking turns writing out gobbledygook.

Re: Is it a bubble?

#458
post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they are better at empathy and conversation than most Imagine the conversations this guy must have with people IRL lol

Do you not talk to ordinary people? They are not intelligent conversationalists. They tend to be more of the "lol" variety.

> Do you not talk to ordinary people? They are not intelligent conversationalists. They tend to be more of the "lol" variety.

Stating that easygoing people are not also intelligent conversationalist sounds like a _you_ problem dripping with ignorance.

Maybe get off the socials for a bit or something, you might need a change of perspective.

Re: Is it a bubble?

#459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

exist in realtime. they don't, we do.

No, you pretend you do. You got 200ms of round trip delay across your nervous system. Some of the modern AI robotics systems already have that beat, sensor data to actuator action.

> Some of the modern AI robotics systems already have that beat, sensor data to actuator action.

What do LLMs have to do with this? You ever see a machine beat a speed cube? So we’ve had “AI” all along and never knew it?!

Oh right, comparing meatspace messaging speeds to copper or fiber doesn’t make sense. Good point.

Re: Is it a bubble?

#460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to hand roll the assembly, but now I delegate that work to my agent, clang. I occasionally override clang or give it hints, but it usually gets it right most of the time. clang doesn't "understand" the hints because it doesn't "understand" anything, but it knows what to do with them! Just like codex.

Given an input clang will always give the same output, not quite the same for llms. Also nobody ever claimed compilers were intelligent or that they "understood" things

An LLM will also give the same output for the same input when the temperature is zero[1]. It only becomes non-deterministic if you choose for it to be. Which is the same for a C compiler. You can choose to add as many random conditionals as you so please.

But there is nothing about a compiler that implies determinism. A compiler is defined by function (taking input on how you want something to work and outputting code), not design. Implementation details are irrelevant. If you use a neural network to compile C source into machine code instead of more traditional approaches, it most definitely remains a compiler. The function is unchanged.

[1] "Faulty" hardware found in the real world can sometimes break this assumption. But a C compiler running on faulty hardware can change the assumption too.

Post reply on HN