I'm tired of hearing about people who are tired of talking about AI - is there a place on the Internet for me?
Talk to founders and builders. I happen to be building automation for drones, which has a smaller intersection to the LLM space.
I'm tired of talking about AI
51–60 of 65 posts
Re: I'm tired of talking about AI
#52Ah, a new entry in the "throw every possible AI criticism at the wall, and see what sticks" genre. As always, going for quantity rather than quality undermines the entire endeavor, as the article gets dominated by the stale and mostly invalid talking points.
"I'm tired about talking about AI, so here's 2000 words about AI" will appear on the surface to be a novel twist, but actually what the author seems to mean is that they don't want to be talked to about AI, have written this, and are now filtering out all rebuttals. It's just the classic fake win of a forum poster claiming this will be their last message on a subject, followed by three pages of text.
Like, of course if talking about AI is causing you distress, stop doing it. But then just stop doing it, don't try to get in the last word some pretense of it being "absolution".
It's a bit of a shame, because I think slightly expanding the last section and cutting out basically all the rest would have worked way better. There has been some discourse on what the skill set for somebody using AI for creating software could look like in the future (it'll change over time, obviously). There hasn't been very much written on who would enjoy that job, and it's something where nobody can rebut the author. They're the #1 expert in the world on their own preferences.
Re: I'm tired of talking about AI
#53AI seems to elicit a different response from people than any other debate I can remember. It's different to blockchain (which had a similar level of "will you all just shut the fuck up about it?") It's different to culture war stuff (which was very toxic and hard to have sensible discussions about - but in a different way). It's the only topic in my lifetime where I have to remember not to even mention it to several…
It is because it is a direct attack against human creativity. It separates people into two very disparate classes: those who want to use and develop it to become more efficient and rich, and those who hate it with a passion because for them, it takes away the beauty of humanity at the forefront of creativity. Unlike blockchain, the philosophy and morality of these two classes, one represented by efficiency and one re…
I find the "vibe coding" idea offensive because I've often been on projects where somebody junior thought he did 80% of the work and then I have to do the other 80% of the work and it's been a very expensive and extensive project of figuring out all the little things and sometimes all of the big things they did wrong.
I really like working with the AI Assistant in IntelliJ IDEA in that it's like pair programming with a junior who is really smart in some ways but weak in other ways. I get back an answer within seconds and can make up my mind whether it is right or wrong or somewhere in between.
Things like Windsurf and Junie on the other hand seem to be mostly a waste of time as they go off and do stuff for 5-20 minutes and when they get back it is usually pretty screwed up an a lot of effort to understand what's wrong with it and fix it... It's very much that "do the last 20% that is 80% of the work" experience.
There is a lot of discourse around creativity and LLMs that I find really annoying on lots of levels.
There are the people who don't have any idea of what creativity is which leads to ideas like: "LLMs (by definition) can't be creative" (comes across way too much like Robert Penrose saying he can do math because he's a thetan) or the many people who don't get that "genius is 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration." There are also the people who are afraid of getting "ripped off" who don't get it that if they got a fair settlement for what was stolen from then it would probably be about $50, not a living wage. [1] They also don't seem to get it that Google's web crawler has been ripping people off since 2001, and just now they're worried. Maybe I have 50% sympathy for the ideas that visual art is devalued by LLMs since I feel that my work is devalued when people are seduced into thinking that the job is 80% done, not 20% done by the LLM.
[1] arrived by dividing some quantity of money that is input or output from the AI machine by the number of content pieces that are put in to it
Re: I'm tired of talking about AI
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
OK - so I deeply value human creativity and I disagree with your first statement. At least I think we don't currently know whether it will work out this way. My hunch is that human creativity is incredibly resilient and will route around damage. (But employability in creative professions? That's a slightly different topic - an orthogonal one strictly speaking)
I think we already do, at least for many people. AI-generated stuff reduces the value that humans put on human creation because human-only creation is harder to find. AI takes the joy of discovery out of many processes and activities. It's of course harder to get jobs in creative fields now such as translation and graphic design. It's a devaluing of creativity and it's discouraging to quite a few creatives. The very…
On top of "hard to find" I think it also displaces the market for real art, there are lots of blogs (or splogs?) like this one that are full of AI slop art, like this one
https://zxonline.net/from-bytes-to-billions-how-the-zx-spect...
maybe the whole article is AI generated, but the second image from the top is just awful. If people get the idea that crap like that is acceptable, how can anybody sell real work?
This blog post is legit
https://frankonfraud.com/sms-blasters-the-fraud-machine-anyo...
so far as I can tell and the AI generated image on it is actually pretty funny and it really problematizes the idea that you could sell art to that kind of market.
Re: I'm tired of talking about AI
#55AI seems to elicit a different response from people than any other debate I can remember. It's different to blockchain (which had a similar level of "will you all just shut the fuck up about it?") It's different to culture war stuff (which was very toxic and hard to have sensible discussions about - but in a different way). It's the only topic in my lifetime where I have to remember not to even mention it to several…
This technology promises to turn us into human cows. What do you expect?
[deleted]
Re: I'm tired of talking about AI
#56what i hated about AI discourse a year ago was how far removed it was from anything concrete. nobody seemed to have a _purpose_ in building AI; no thing they wanted to use it _for_. it was a silly text or image generator, would someday become a "do everything" device, and the progression from here to there was unknowable: it was just a plot device for anyone suddenly interested in writing speculative fiction. in my v…
I'm personally interested about the intersection of AI and physics
Re: I'm tired of talking about AI
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think we already do, at least for many people. AI-generated stuff reduces the value that humans put on human creation because human-only creation is harder to find. AI takes the joy of discovery out of many processes and activities. It's of course harder to get jobs in creative fields now such as translation and graphic design. It's a devaluing of creativity and it's discouraging to quite a few creatives. The very…
On top of "hard to find" I think it also displaces the market for real art, there are lots of blogs (or splogs?) like this one that are full of AI slop art, like this one https://zxonline.net/from-bytes-to-billions-how-the-zx-spect... maybe the whole article is AI generated, but the second image from the top is just awful. If people get the idea that crap like that is acceptable, how can anybody sell real work? This…
How about "schglop?"
Fair bit of slop indeed with half-buried side (rather a main?) of unsolicited schlep request
That'd make frankonfraud a golps
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44641575
https://archive.today/latest/frankonfraud.com/sms-blasters-t...
My 2s helping frank go full .org :)
Re: I'm tired of talking about AI
#58what i hated about AI discourse a year ago was how far removed it was from anything concrete. nobody seemed to have a _purpose_ in building AI; no thing they wanted to use it _for_. it was a silly text or image generator, would someday become a "do everything" device, and the progression from here to there was unknowable: it was just a plot device for anyone suddenly interested in writing speculative fiction. in my v…
I'm personally interested about the intersection of AI and physics
Do you follow Steve Brunton's YT channel[1]? His physics stuff is mostly fluid dynamics but still pretty cool.
Re: I'm tired of talking about AI
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is because it is a direct attack against human creativity. It separates people into two very disparate classes: those who want to use and develop it to become more efficient and rich, and those who hate it with a passion because for them, it takes away the beauty of humanity at the forefront of creativity. Unlike blockchain, the philosophy and morality of these two classes, one represented by efficiency and one re…
I find the "vibe coding" idea offensive because I've often been on projects where somebody junior thought he did 80% of the work and then I have to do the other 80% of the work and it's been a very expensive and extensive project of figuring out all the little things and sometimes all of the big things they did wrong. I really like working with the AI Assistant in IntelliJ IDEA in that it's like pair programming with…
> There are the people who don't have any idea of what creativity is which leads to ideas like: "LLMs (by definition) can't be creative
It's not that LLMs can't be creative. It's that we shouldn't allow them to because creativity is more than just about output. It's about human expression. End of story.
Re: I'm tired of talking about AI
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you could point to a single instance in human history where the "Luddites" of the day proved right in the long run by literally attacking technology, it might help you make your case for rehabilitating them. Or at least it might serve as an interesting basis for discussion.
Sure - the Luddites were correct. Unless you're defining "correct" as "stopped the development of a disruptive technology", which would be, of course, ignorant. Edit: The post I'm replying to was edited to redefine the context to be the defense of Luddites specifically for destroying machines. I may have used different words/tone in that case, but my opinion is still qualitatively the same. Just know I am speaking ho…
Sorry, I felt it necessary to clarify my point. The Luddites were justified in asking for a share of the fruits of their labor, just as as any of of us are, but in a larger sense their attack on the machinery of progress was an attack on just that... progress.
How is your position distinguishable from any other phrasing of the broken-window fallacy? Humans shouldn't aspire to do a robot's job. We have better things to do.