Live data from Hacker News

AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

rakhim.exotext.com

51–60 of 190 posts

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#51

How do LLMs help Google, an ad company, generate more ad revenue. LLMs drive the traffic away from websites, give you answer directly without needing bother with ads. How does it benefit Google's ad business?

Ad clicks are a trifle compared to the possibility of winning the game of displacing vast amounts of labor and delivering ads and narratives undisclosed through conversational AI output. At that point you've won the economy, period.

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#52
post #7

Expresses a longing for the semantic web. > Remember Semantic Web? The web was supposed to evolve into semantically structured, linked, machine-readable data that would enable amazing opportunities. That never happened. I think the lesson to be learned is in answering the question "Why didn't the semantic web happen?"

"Why didn't the semantic web happen?" I have literally been doing we development since their was a web, and the companies I developed for are openly hostile to the idea of putting their valuable, or perceived valuable, information online in a format that could be easily scraped. Information doesn't want to be free, it wants to be paid for. Unless the information shared pulls visitors to the site it doesn't need to be…

I was thinking of that in terms of siloed web sites but your description of walling off information is broader and more appropriate.

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#53
post #7

Expresses a longing for the semantic web. > Remember Semantic Web? The web was supposed to evolve into semantically structured, linked, machine-readable data that would enable amazing opportunities. That never happened. I think the lesson to be learned is in answering the question "Why didn't the semantic web happen?"

"Why didn't the semantic web happen?" I have literally been doing we development since their was a web, and the companies I developed for are openly hostile to the idea of putting their valuable, or perceived valuable, information online in a format that could be easily scraped. Information doesn't want to be free, it wants to be paid for. Unless the information shared pulls visitors to the site it doesn't need to be…

> Information doesn't want to be free, it wants to be paid for. Unless the information shared pulls visitors to the site it doesn't need to be public.

That's a cultural and societal problem, not a technology problem. The motivations (profit) are wrong, and don't lead to true innovations, only to financialization.

So long as people need to pay to eat, then information will also want to continue to be paid for, and our motivations will continue to be misaligned with true innovations, especially if said innovations would make life easier but wouldn't result in profit.

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#54

How do LLMs help Google, an ad company, generate more ad revenue. LLMs drive the traffic away from websites, give you answer directly without needing bother with ads. How does it benefit Google's ad business?

Ad clicks are a trifle compared to the possibility of winning the game of displacing vast amounts of labor and delivering ads and narratives undisclosed through conversational AI output. At that point you've won the economy, period.

> winning the game of displacing vast amounts of labor and delivering ads and narratives undisclosed through conversational AI output. At that point you've won the economy, period.

In a functional democracy, all you should win by doing that is harsh antitrust action.

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#55
post #23

Fresh plums right off the tree taste significantly better than the ones you can get in the produce isle, which are in turn better than canned, which are themselves still better than re-hydrated prunes. In scaling out computation to the masses, we went from locally grown plums that took a lot of work and were only available to a small number of people that had a plum tree or knew someone that had one, to building near…

I really don't like this analogy, and I really don't like the premise of this article.

Writing software is only so scalable. It doesn't matter all of the shortcuts we take, like Electron and JavaScript. There are only so many engineers with so much time, and there are abundantly many problems to solve.

A better analogy would be to look at what's happening to AI images and video. Those have 10,000x'd the fundamental cost savings, time savings, and personnel requirements. It's an industrialization moment. As a filmmaker who has made several photons-on-glass films, this is a game changer and lifts the entire creative industry to a level where individuals can outdo Pixar.

That is the lens with which to look at what AI will do to software. We're going from hand-carving stone wheels to the Model T.

This is all just getting started. We've barely used what the models of today offer us.

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#56
I think I broadly agree with this. I am super frustrated that everythign always wants me to search for things. As an example Finders default search while looking at a folder is the whole machine instead of a filter in the directory you are viewing in seems totally insane to me. It's almost like they don't want me to know where my files are.

I can understand that it's a result, to a degree of cloud services and peoples primary mode swapping to opening and app and opening recents or searching instead of opening a file to open an app but it does mean that you're at the mercy of what I experience as some pretty crap search algorithms that don't seem to want you to find the information you're looking for. I keep encountering searches that rank fuzzy matches over exact matches or aren't stable as you continue to complete the same word and I just don't understand how that's acceptable after being pointed out if search is what I'm supposed to be using.

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#57
Uh, the author got so close to make the same realization I had while working on a project [0] for the Wikimedia Foundation: we wouldn't need search engines if we had better tooling to query semantic databases like wikidata.

However, the thing that the author might be missing is that the semantic web exists. [1] The problem is that the tools that we can use to access it are not being developed by Big Tech. Remember Freebase? Remember that Google could have easily kept it around but decided to fold it and shoved it into the structured query results? That's because Google is not interested in "organizing the world's information and make it universally accessible" unless it is done in a way that it can justify itself into being the data broker.

I'm completely out of time or energy for any side project at the moment, but if someone wants to steal my idea: please take a llm model and fine tune so that it can take any question and turn it into a SparQL query for Wikidata. Also, make a web crawler that reads the page and turns into a set of RDF triples or QuickStatements for any new facts that are presented. This would effectively be the "ultimate information organizer" and could potentially replace Wikidata as most people's entry page of the internet.

[0]: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/QuickStatements_3.0

[1] https://guides.library.ucla.edu/semantic-web/datasets

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#58
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

eh I feel this but it's a lot simpler than that. Not "if everyone built everything correctly" but "if everyone's work was even slightly better than complete garbage". I do not see many examples of companies building things that are not complete embarrassing shit. I worked at some companies and the things we built was complete embarrassing shit. The reasons are obvious: nobody cares internally to do it, and nobody ext…

Wait, which is the correct programming language to defend? C and Javascript are on pretty opposite sides of most spectra....

the new ones we should have made by now that fix their problems...

Zig and Rust and TS are a start

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#59
post #23

Fresh plums right off the tree taste significantly better than the ones you can get in the produce isle, which are in turn better than canned, which are themselves still better than re-hydrated prunes. In scaling out computation to the masses, we went from locally grown plums that took a lot of work and were only available to a small number of people that had a plum tree or knew someone that had one, to building near…

But can it beat William Carlos Williams?

they were delicious

so sweet

and so cold

:)

Re: AI is impressive because we've failed at personal computing

#60
I find traditional web search and LLM search to be complementary technologies, and this is a good example of that. Both have their uses and if you get the information you need using one or the other, we are all happy.

I think the example query here actually shows a problem with the query languages used in web search rather than an intrinsic inability of web search. It contains what amounts to a natural language subquery starting with "in the same year". In other words, to evaluate this query properly, we need to first evaluate this subquery and then use that information to evaluate the overall query. Google Search and almost all other traditional web search engines use intentionally oversimplified query languages that disallow nested queries let alone subqueries, so this example really is just revealing a problem with the query language rather than a problem with web search overall. With a better query language, we might get better results.

Post reply on HN