“Remember the market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
Is it a bubble?
531–540 of 605 posts
Re: Is it a bubble?
#532> In many advanced software teams, developers no longer write the code; they type in what they want, and AI systems generate the code for them. What a wild and speculative claim. Is there any source for this information?
Wow, reading these comments and I feel like I've entered a parallel reality. My job involves implementing research ML and I use it literally all the time, very fascinating to see how many have such strong negative reactions. As long as you are good at reviewing code, spec-ing carefully, and make atomic changes - why would you not be using this basically all the time?
> As long as you are good at reviewing code, spec-ing carefully, and make atomic changes - why would you not be using this basically all the time?
This implies that you are an expert/seasoned programmer. And not everybody is an expert on this industry (especially the reviewing code part).
Re: Is it a bubble?
#533Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am sorry for you. You must surround yourself with a lot of awful people. That is pretty sad to read. Get out of whatever you are stuck in, it can't be good for you.
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.
What you are saying is that 9 out of 10 never experience domestic violence despite cohabitating with 10-20 other people during their lifetime.
Re: Is it a bubble?
#534Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't prepare by making predictions about when it will pop, you prepare by hedging etc. Just as those who live in earthquake-prone areas build earthquake-resistant buildings.
> you prepare by hedging etc. Has to be done before the eventual collapse of the bubble and still proves my whole point: >> the whole point is you have to prepare before it eventually pops.
Knowing whether it is or isn't a bubble isn't relevant to the decision to prepare. You prepare for both possibilities!
Re: Is it a bubble?
#535Re: Is it a bubble?
#536Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've written more than one compiler, so I definitely understand how compilers work. It seems you're trying to call anything that transforms one thing into another a compiler. We all know what a compiler is and what it does (except maybe you? It's not clear to me) so I genuinely don't understand why you're trying to overload this terminology further so that you can call LLMs compilers. They are obviously and fundament…
> Is a natural language translation program a compiler? We have always agreed that a natural language compiler is theoretically possible. Is a natural language translation program the same as a natural language compiler, or do you see some kind of difference? If so, what is the difference?
> We have always agreed that a natural language compiler is theoretically possible
citation? source? Who is we?
Re: Is it a bubble?
#537Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm quite skeptical of the data centers in space claim, but I think a proof of concept can certainly be achieved in five years. I'm less convinced that we'll ever see widescale deployment of data center satellites. And to be fair, I've read that Google's timelines for this project extend far beyond a 5 year horizon. I think it's a rational research direction for them, since it gets people excited and historically man…
Do data centers on Earth have no employees present, and none who ever come on site for the life of the data center? Prove that out on earth and I will start to believe your space data center.
I'm quite sure that can be done, if you jack up the price and pare down requirements enough. The question is, would the result be useful.
Re: Is it a bubble?
#538Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it very obviously isn't. For example (though this is a year or so ago), look at when people hooked Claude up to Pokemon. It got stuck on things that no human, even a small child, would get stuck on (such as going in and out of a building over and over). I'm sure we could train an LLM to play Pokemon, but you don't need to train a child to play. You hand them the game and they figure it out with no prior exper…
100%. Slack does this annoying thing where I click a chat, which gains focus, but I actually have to click again to switch to the chat I want. Every now and then I slack the wrong person, fortunately not to disastrous consequences, yet. If I had a moderately intelligent human who never loses focus looking over my shoulder, they might say something like "Hey, you're typing a Tailwind CSS issue in the DevOps group chat…
a recent example I came across was losing a single airpod (dropped on street) and getting a find my notification only when I was already several blocks away. Went back, 30 mins had passed, nowhere to be found.
This is the kind of thing that makes it really clear how far away we actually are from 'real world' intelligence or maybe better described as common sense in our devices, in the detail.
Obviously, the intelligent thing to do there would have been to spam me with notifications the instant my devices noticed my airpods were separated by > 10 metres, one was moving away from the other, and the stationary one was in a street or at least some place that was not home.
But although AI can search really well, and all sorts of other interesting stuff, I think we all have to admit that it still seems really hard to imagine it taking 'initiative' so to speak even in that super simple situation and making a good decision and acting on it in the sensible way that any human would, unless it was specifically programmed to do so.
And that's the problem I think fundamentally, at least for now. There's just too much randomness and too many situations that can occur in the real world, and there's too many integration points for LLMs to deal with these, even supposing they would deal with them well.
In theory it seems like it could be done, but in practice it isn't being done even after years of the tech being available, and by the most well funded companies.
That's the kind of thing that makes me think the long tail of usefulness of LLMs on the ground is still really far away.
Re: Is it a bubble?
#539Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's difficult to know what people really believe, especially after only a few minutes of discussion, but I would say most people I talk to don't believe AGI is even possible. And they probably think their life won't be changed much by LLMs, AI, etc.
I haven't heard a good argument for why AGI isn't already here. It has average humans beat and seems generally to be better-than-novice in any given field that requires intelligence. They play Go, they write music, they've read Shakespeare, they are better at empathy and conversation than most. What more are we asking AI to do? And can a normal human do it?
>What more are we asking AI to do? And can a normal human do it?
1. Learn/Improve yourself with each action you take 2. Create better editions/versions of yourself 3. Solve problem in areas that you were not trained for simply by trial and error where you yourself decide if what you are doing is correct or wrong
Re: Is it a bubble?
#540Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow, reading these comments and I feel like I've entered a parallel reality. My job involves implementing research ML and I use it literally all the time, very fascinating to see how many have such strong negative reactions. As long as you are good at reviewing code, spec-ing carefully, and make atomic changes - why would you not be using this basically all the time?
> As long as you are good at reviewing code, spec-ing carefully, and make atomic changes - why would you not be using this basically all the time? This implies that you are an expert/seasoned programmer. And not everybody is an expert on this industry (especially the reviewing code part).
I thought this was a forum for seasoned engineers? But yes, I agree that this widens the skill gap and makes the on-ramp steeper.