Live data from Hacker News

AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

kasava.dev

511–520 of 608 posts

Re: AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

#511

Ultimately, AI is meant to replace you, not empower you. 1 - This exoskeleton analogy might hold true for a couple more years at most. While it is comforting to suggest that AI empowers workers to be more productive, like chess, AI will soon plan better, execute better, and have better taste. Human-in-the-loop will just be far worse than letting AI do everything. 2 - Dario and Dwarkesh were openly chatting about how…

>First is the replacement of white-collar labor, then blue-collar labor once robotics is solved. On the road to AGI, your employment, and the ability to feed your family, is a minor nuisance. My attempt to talk you out of it: If nobody has a job then nobody can pay to make the robot and AI companies rich.

Who needs the money when you have an autonomous system to produce all the energy and resources you need? These systems simply do not need the construct of money as we know it at a certain point.

Re: AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

#512
post #108

It’s a tool like a linter. It’s a fancy tool, but calling it anything more than a tool is hype

Did you ever you the newest LLMs with a harness? Because I usually hear this kind of talk from people whose most recent interaction was with GPT-4o copy-pasting code into the chat window. Maybe I'm biased but I don't buy someone truly thinking that "it's just a tool like a linter" after using it on non-trivial stuff.

I'm using Claude Code (and Codex) (with the expensive subscriptions) on an app I'm building right now. I'm trying to be maximalist with them (to learn the most I can about them .. and also that subscription isn't cheap!). My impression, and yes, this is using the latest models and harness and all that would agree with the GP. They're a very handy tool. They make me faster. They also do a lot of things that, as a professional software developer, I have to frequently correct. They duplicate code like nobodies business. They decide on weird boundaries for functions and parameters. They undo bug fixes they just made. I think they're useful, but the hype is out of control. I would not trust software made with these tools by someone that couldn't write that software by hand. It might work superficially, but I'm definitely not giving any personal data to a vibe coded app with all the security implications.

Re: AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

#514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not entirely clear how LLMs that can play chess do so, but it is clearly very different from the way other machines do so. The construct a board, they can estimate a players skill and adjust accordingly, and unlike other machines and similarly to humans, they are sensitive to how a certain position came to be when predicting the next move. Regardless, there's plenty of reasoning in chess.

It’s very clear how, chess moves and positions are vector encoded into their training data, when they are prompted with a certain board state, they respond with the most probable response to that. There is no reason.

Actual Researchers can't give you a complete answer but you can. Whatever you say.

Re: AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

#515
post #442

There's an undertone of self-soothing "AI will leverage me, not replace me", which I don't agree with especially in the long run, at least in software. In the end it will be the users sculpting formal systems like playdoh. In the medium run, "AI is not a co-worker" is exactly right. The idea of a co-worker will go away. Human collaboration on software is fundamentally inefficient. We pay huge communication/synchroniz…

I love this optimistic take. Unfortunately, I believe the following will happen: By positioning themselves close to law makers, the AI companies will in the near future declare ownership of all software code developed using their software. They will slowly erode their terms of service, as happens to most internet software, step by step, until they claim total ownership. The point is to license the code.

AFAIK you can't copyright AI generated content. I don't know where that gets blurry when it's mixed in with your own content (ie, how much do you need to modify it to own it), but I think that by that definition these companies couldn't claim your code at all. Also, with the lawsuit that happened to Anthropic where they had to pay billions for ingesting copyrighted content, it might actually end up working the other way around.

Re: AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

#516

Ultimately, AI is meant to replace you, not empower you. 1 - This exoskeleton analogy might hold true for a couple more years at most. While it is comforting to suggest that AI empowers workers to be more productive, like chess, AI will soon plan better, execute better, and have better taste. Human-in-the-loop will just be far worse than letting AI do everything. 2 - Dario and Dwarkesh were openly chatting about how…

And you forgot to mention that thing they have in Start Trek that generates stuff out of thin air. The replicator. We’re so cooked.

Re: AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

#517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm rounding the corner on a ground's up reimplementation of `nix` in what is now about 34 hours of wall clock time, I have almost all of it on `wf-record`, I'll post a stream, but you can see the commit logs here: https://github.com/straylight-software/nix/tree/b7r6/correct... Everyone has the same ability to use OpenRouter, I have a new event loop based on `io_uring` with deterministic playbook modeled on the Trini…

And it's teachable. Here's a colleague who is nearly done with a correct reimplementation of the OpenCode client/server API: https://github.com/straylight-software/weapon-server-hs Here's another colleague with a Git forge that will always work and handle 100x what GitHub does per infrastructure dollar while including stacked diffs and Jujitsu support as native in about 4 days: https://github.com/straylight-software/…

/tangent i've always like the word "straylight", I use to run a fansite for a local band and the site was called straylight6. This was maybe 20 years ago.

Re: AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

#519
post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLM's cannot synthesize text, they can only concatenate or mix statistically. Synthesis requires logical reasoning. That's not how LLMs work.

Yes it is, LLMs perform logical multi step reasoning all the time, see math proofs, coding etc. And whether you call it synthesis or statistical mixing is just semantics. Do LLMs truly understand? Who knows, probably not, but they do more than you make it out to be.

I don't want to speak too much out of my depth here, I'm still learning how these things work on a mechanical level, but my understanding of how these things "reason" is it seems like they're more or less having a conversation with themselves. IE, burning a lot of tokens in the hopes that the follow up questions and answers it generates leads to a better continuation of the conversation overall. But just like talking to a human, you're likely to come up with better ideas when you're talking to someone else, not just yourself, so the human in the loop seems pretty important to get the AI to remix things into something genuinely new and useful.

Re: AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

#520

Ultimately, AI is meant to replace you, not empower you. 1 - This exoskeleton analogy might hold true for a couple more years at most. While it is comforting to suggest that AI empowers workers to be more productive, like chess, AI will soon plan better, execute better, and have better taste. Human-in-the-loop will just be far worse than letting AI do everything. 2 - Dario and Dwarkesh were openly chatting about how…

>First is the replacement of white-collar labor, then blue-collar labor once robotics is solved. On the road to AGI, your employment, and the ability to feed your family, is a minor nuisance. My attempt to talk you out of it: If nobody has a job then nobody can pay to make the robot and AI companies rich.

Being rich is ultimately about owning and being able to defend resources. IF something like 99% of humans become irrelevant to the machine run utopia for the elites, whatever currency the poors use to pay for services among each other will be worthless to the top 1% when they simply don't need them or their services.
Post reply on HN