Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 622 posts

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#551

Post by netdevnet »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #282
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems you are missing a lot of "ifs" in that hypothetical! Nobody knows how things like coding assistants or other AI applications will pan out. Maybe it'll be Oracle selling Meta-licenced solutions that gets the lion's share of the market. Maybe custom coding goes away for many business applications as off-the-shelf solutions get smarter. A future where all that AI (or some hypothetical AGI) changes is work being…

> you are missing a lot of "ifs" in that hypothetical The big one being I'm not assuming AGI. Low-level coding tasks, the kind frequently outsourced, are within the realm of being competitive with offshoring with known methods. My point is we don't need to assume AGI for these valuations to make sense.

I don't know what's your experience with outsourcing. But people outsource full projects not the writing of a couple of methods. With LLMs still unable to fully understand relatively simple stuff, you can't expect them to deliver a project whose specification (like most software projects) contains ambiguities that only an experienced dev can detect and ask deep questions about the intention and purpose of the project. LLMs are nowhere near that. To be able to handle external uncertainty and turn it into certainty, to explain why technical decisions were made, to understand the purpose of a project and how it matches the project. To handle the overall uncertainties of writing code with other's people's code. All this is stuff outsourced teams do well. But LLMs won't be anywhere near good for at least a decade. I am calling it

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#553

Post by netdevnet »

ehnto wrote: post #398
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they are not agentic systems that can develop an entire solution from scratch given a specification, which in my experience is more typcical of the work that is being outsourced If there is one domain where we're seeing tangible progress from AI, it's in working towards this goal. Difficult projects aren't in scope. But most tech, especially most tech branded IT, is not difficult. Everyone doesn't need an inventory…

There have been off the shelf solutions for so many common software use cases, for decades now. I think the reason we still see so much custom software is that the devil is always in the details, and strict details are not an LLMs strong suit. LLMs are in my opinion hamstrung at the starting gate in regards to replacing software teams, as they would need to be able to understand complex business requirements perfectl…

This, code is written by humans for humans. LLMs cannot compete no matter how much data you throw at them. A world in which software is written by AI will likely won't be code that will be readable by humans. And that is dangerous for anything where people's health, privacy, finances or security is involved

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#554

Post by netdevnet »

Barrin92 wrote: post #518
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> level of investment and profit they are looking for can only be justified by creating AGI What are you basing this on? IT outsourcing is a $500+ billion industry. If OpenAI et al can run even a 10% margin, that business alone justifies their valuation.

if the AI business is a bit more mundane than Altman thinks and there's diminishing returns the market is going to be even more commodified than it already is and you're not going to make any margins or somehow own the entire market. That's already the case, Anthropic works about as well, there's other companies a few months behind, open source is like a year behind. That's literally Zucc's entire play, in 5 years th…

genius move by Mark, this could make them the google of LLMs

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#555

Post by vidarh »

vidarh wrote: post #397
sdesol wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "let's only allow the LLM to do things we know it is rock-solid at." Even this is insanely hard in my opinion. The one thing that you would assume LLM to excel at is spelling and grammar checking for the English language, but even the top model (GPT-4o) can be insanely stupid/unpredictable at times. Take the following example from my tool: https://app.gitsense.com/?doc=6c9bada92&model=GPT-4o&samples... 5 models are…

I do contract work on fine-tuning efforts, and I can tell you that most humans aren't designed to be public-facing either. While LLMs do plenty of awful things, people make the most incredibly stupid mistakes too, and that is what LLMs needs to be benchmarked against. The problem is that most of the people evaluating LLMs are better educated than most and often smarter than most. When you see any quantity of prompts…

Yikes, that was an unfortunate auto-correct and too late to edit. "LLM losers" was meant to be "LLM users".

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#556

Post by hatefulmoron »

handfuloflight wrote: post #241
tartoran wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's wishful thinking at best. Throw it all in a bucket and it will get infected with being and life.

Don't see where your parent comment said or implied that the point was for being and life to emerge.

I think their point is that having complex interactions between simple things doesn't necessarily result in any great emergent behavior. You can't just throw gloopy masses of cells into a bucket, shake it about, and get a cat.

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#557

Post by RivieraKid »

visarga wrote: post #516
eslaught wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never get this argument. I've seen a deer on a road maybe once. I've seen a rabbit on a road zero times. But I know what to do if I see one. Is that because the "video" of my perception has many "frames"? Even if that's true at some level, I think it's massively missing the point. Yeah, so I saw that one deer from a lot of angles. But current AI training is like the equivalent of taking every deer that has ever bee…

You might personally have seen a deer just once, but human evolution, and animal evolution prior to that have practiced this skill a lot. AI doesn't have the advantage of evolutionary priors baked in, so it needs explicit walking through many combinations to infer its structure from data, and is remarkably efficient. GPT-4 'only' trained on the amount of language that 30,000 humans use in their lifetime. But we have…

Human DNA is just 750 and only a fraction of it is something that may be called "brain pre-training".

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#558

Post by raxxorraxor »

LASR wrote: post #115

Question for the group here: do we honestly feel like we've exhausted the options for delivering value on top of the current generation of LLMs? I lead a team exploring cutting edge LLM applications and end-user features. It's my intuition from experience that we have a LONG way to go. GPT-4o / Claude 3.5 are the go-to models for my team. Every combination of technical investment + LLMs yields a new list of potential…

The context is a strict limitation if you work with data analysis or knowledge bases. Embeddings work, but the products we know get left and right mostly do not offer such capabilities at all. In that case most of these products remain decent chat bots.

For coding LLMs certainly are helpful, but I prefer local models instead of anything on offer right now. There is just much more potential here.

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#559

Post by zkry »

jmward01 wrote: post #175

Every negative headline I see about AI hitting a wall or being over-hyped makes me think of the early 2000's with that new thing the 'internet' (yes, I know the internet is a lot older than that). There is little doubt in my mind that ten years from now nearly every aspect of life will be deeply connected to AI just like the internet took over everything in the late 90's and early 2000's and is now deeply connected t…

There are a lot of comparisons that could be drawn: web 3.0, the internet, the dot com bubble, etc. but I think the most appropriate comparison would be to... AI in the past. No one doubts that there was a lot of value coming from that research. In fact a lot of it is incorperated in our every day life. But it didn't live up to its hype. I suspect the same will be true for this wave of AI (and perhaps an associated AI winter).

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#560

Post by dmd »

wokwokwok wrote: post #465
dmd wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, yes. There are other pieces of code on the internet that use a for loop or an if statement. By that logic what you wrote was also composed that way. After all, you’ve used all words that have been used before! I bet even phrases like “that is extremely similar” and “generated from a corpus” and “unambiguously false”. Again, I really find it hard to believe that anyone could make an argument like the one you’re ma…

> I really find it hard to believe What's true and what's not true is not related to what you personally believe. It is factually and unambiguously false to state that generated code is, in general, not similar to other code from the corpus it is trained on. > And none of it appears anywhere else; I've checked. ^ Even if this statement, is not false (I'm skeptical, but whatever), in general , it would be false for mo…

This is like having an argument about whether airplanes can fly with someone who has never been in, piloted, or even really seen an airplane but is very, very sure of their understanding of how they can’t possibly work.

Among other things: it writes new, useful code daily in our local DSL, which appears nowhere on the internet and in fact didn't exist a few months ago.

Post reply on HN