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

Labor market impacts of AI: A new measure and early evidence

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 584 posts

Re: Labor market impacts of AI: A new measure and early evidence

#561

Post by tomhow »

izacus wrote: post #560
tomhow wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because your ignorance is painful. It's not acceptable to attack a fellow community member like this on HN. The guidelines make it clear we're aiming for better than this: Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes. Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling na…

Being kind to people who blatantly lie about history and hide suffering of thousands is how we got into the current mess.

We don't need a defiant mini-sermon and it's very poor conduct to use the term "blatantly lie" for a fellow community member who is just expressing their understanding of a topic. It is never morally necessary to abuse people on this site. This is a community not a battleground.

If you have a different understanding of the topic, share it, so all can benefit. That's what people do when they are sincere about contributing positively here.

If instead you insist on continuing to use abusive terms towards others here, we'll have to ban the account.

Re: Labor market impacts of AI: A new measure and early evidence

#562

Post by bandrami »

Izkata wrote: post #514
bee_rider wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thinking of it, I haven’t seen as many “copy paste from StackOverflow” memes lately. Maybe LLMs have given people the ability to 1) Do that inside their IDEs, which is less funny 2) Generate blog post about it instead of memes

Python one-upped that a long time ago: from stackoverflow import quick_sort https://github.com/drathier/stack-overflow-import

30 years ago (well, 28 years ago) we had the Perl Cookbook which was basically Stack Overflow but printed and without annoying moderators closing your questions. That and the camel book never even made it back to my bookshelf because they just always sat open on my desk.

Re: Labor market impacts of AI: A new measure and early evidence

#563

Post by staticassertion »

gilbetron wrote: post #412
staticassertion wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When it comes to novel work, LLMs become "fast typers" for me and little more. They accelerate testing phases but that's it. The bar for novelty isn't very high either - "make this specific system scale in a way that others won't" isn't a thing an LLM can ever do on its own, though it can be an aid. LLMs also are quite bad for security. They can find simple bugs, but they don't find the really interesting ones that l…

What was your take on this? https://aisle.com/blog/what-ai-security-research-looks-like-...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47274478

Re: Labor market impacts of AI: A new measure and early evidence

#564

Post by staticassertion »

bdangubic wrote: post #405
staticassertion wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, but I'm not really convinced. LLMs make some aspects of the job faster, mainly I don't have to type anymore. But... that was always a relatively small portion of the job. Design, understanding constraints, maintaining and operating code, deciding what to do, what not to do, when to do it, gaining consensus across product, eng, support, and customers, etc. I do all of those things as an engineer. Coding faster…

I think the core issue (evidenced by constant stream of debates on HN) is the everyone’s experience with LLMs is different. I think we can all agree that some experiences are like yours while there are others that are vastly different than yours. Sometimes I hear “you just don’t know how to use them etc…” as if there is some magic setup that makes them do shit but the reality is that our actual jobs are drastically d…

I don't think this is an issue of experience here. I don't know that anyone has claimed that LLMs can create truly novel solutions to complex problems given that the technology is token prediction.

Re: Labor market impacts of AI: A new measure and early evidence

#565

Post by p1esk »

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #275
blackcatsec wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are you excited for this? They’re not going to give YOU those peoples’ salaries. You will get none of it. In fact, it will drag your salary through the floor because of all the available talent.

I'm very confused about this. Salary is only one portion of your total compensation. The vast majority of tech companies offer equity in a company. The two ways to increase the FMV of your equity is: increase your equity stake or increase the value of the total equity available. Hitting the same goals with fewer people means your run rate is lower, which increases the value of your equity (the FMV prices in lower COG…

In the last three startups I worked at I didn’t bother exercising my vested equity - even a successful exit would at best triple the price of those shares - not worth the risk. One of those three startups already failed.

Re: Labor market impacts of AI: A new measure and early evidence

#566

Post by sheeshkebab »

Madmallard wrote: post #381
sheeshkebab wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In those situations you basically need to guide llm to do it properly. It rarely one shots complex problems like this, especially in non web dev, but could make it faster than doing it manually.

Oh believe me I broke it down super finely, down to single files and even single functions in some places It still is completely and utterly hopeless

The only model that works well for complex things is Opus, and even then barely (but it does and you need to use api/token pricing if you want guarantee it’s the real thing).

Re: Labor market impacts of AI: A new measure and early evidence

#567

Post by leptons »

sph wrote: post #406
leptons wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I now do more in days than others might in a week. I've always done more in days than others might in a week. YMMV.

So do I, this is why I work 15 hours a week [1] and laugh at those that use this new productivity tool to work themselves even harder for the same pay. Wasn’t the point of automation to work less? 1: pre-AI. Not keen on becoming a manager of an idiot savant, so I’m planning my exit.

I doubt you're as productive as someone competent not using AI.

Re: Labor market impacts of AI: A new measure and early evidence

#568

Post by keeda »

thewebguyd wrote: post #516
keeda wrote: post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The memecoin thing was stupid, totally. Yegge should never have touched it, because well, crypto, but also because that's a distraction from the actual project. > popularity is in no way a measure of utility Why would it be popular if it's not useful? Yegge is not like some superstar whose products are popular just because he made them. And while some people may be chasing dollars, most of them are building software…

> I tend to mean "heavily AI-assisted coding" whereas you likely mean "never look at the code YOLO coding." The original point that sparked this sub-thread though is that AI is being overhyped. If actual vibe coding (YOLO it, never look at or understand the code, thus truly enabling non-technical folk to have revolutionary power and ability) doesn't work, then AI is yet just another tool in the toolbelt like any othe…

But that's the thing... I don't YOLO it, I review all the code it generates, yet I personally am doing something -- using computer vision, a field I had negligible prior background in -- that would have taken a team of 2 - 3, AND about a semester or year of an advanced degree to catch up on the field! I am effectively doing the work of a team.

So when I see people online say they feel 10x productive, I tend to believe them. But I'm working solo, and have none of the encumbrances and "Conway Overhead" of coordinating with a lot of other people, so I also understand why the overall effect is so limited. Which is why I think current companies are "shaped wrong" for AI.

When companies eventually adapt, it will be a "labor economy transformation force" because the same dynamics will play out across all knowledge work. And I am not talking as an AI booster, but as a parent whose kids are interested in software engineering; I have every incentive to hope my prognostications do not come true, but I prefer being prepared for the worst.

Re: Labor market impacts of AI: A new measure and early evidence

#569

Post by blackcatsec »

camdenreslink wrote: post #471
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm very confused about this. Salary is only one portion of your total compensation. The vast majority of tech companies offer equity in a company. The two ways to increase the FMV of your equity is: increase your equity stake or increase the value of the total equity available. Hitting the same goals with fewer people means your run rate is lower, which increases the value of your equity (the FMV prices in lower COG…

Equity is negotiable just like salary, and if supply of developer labor increases with the same or less demand, you'll get less equity just like you will get less salary.

I can't believe the person you replied to thinks that they're going to get some magical more amount of equity because you can hopefully do more with fewer people. That's assuming the entire business landscape doesn't also change with AI, disincentivizing so much investment in companies in the first place because someone else with AI can create a competitor in a shorter amount of time...
Post reply on HN