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

AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

kasava.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 608 posts

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

#591

Post by pousada »

windexh8er wrote: post #583
pousada wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does “truly thinking or reasoning” even mean for you? I don’t think we even have a coherent definition of human intelligence, let alone of non-human ones.

Oh, yes. The trope of "but what does it even mean to think". If you can't speak, can you think? Yes. Large Language model. Thinking is not predicated on language. A few good starts for you. Please refute all of these arguments in your spare time to convince me otherwise: * https://machinelearning.apple.com/research/illusion-of-think... * https://archive.is/FM4y8 * https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/secondary-school-mat…

My point was not that I’m 100% convinced that LLMs can think or are intelligent.

My point was that we don’t have a great definition for (human) intelligence either. The articles you posted also don’t seem to be too confident in what human intelligence actually entails.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence

> There is controversy over how to define intelligence. Scholars describe its constituent abilities in various ways, and differ in the degree to which they conceive of intelligence as quantifiable.

Given that an LLM isn’t even human but essentially an alien entity, who can confidently say they are intelligent or not?

I’m very sceptic of those who are very convinced one or the other way.

Are LLMs intelligent in the way that humans are? I’m quite sure they aren’t.

Are LLMs just stochastic parrots? I don’t find that framing convincing anymore either.

Either way it’s not clear, just check how this topic is discussed daily in most frontpage threads for the last couple of years

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

#592

Post by DrewADesign »

emp17344 wrote: post #481
topocite wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You obviously haven't thought about economics much at all to say something this simplistic. There are so many counter examples of this being wrong that it is not even worth bothering. I love economics, but it is largely a field based around half truths and intellectual fraud. It is actually why it is an interesting subject to study.

Denial of economic truths is denial of science. Not sure what to tell you. What parts do you reject?

Like denying that more efficiency without a commensurate increase in product demand means the demand for labor goes down, which means fewer jobs, and lower salaries? You don’t pay people what they’re actually worth, you pay people what they’ll work for. Requesting more money because you’re making the company more money is only viable if there aren’t qualified people lining up for the chance to take your role. Even without more money, well-paid people tend to regrettably get laid off in those circumstances.

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

#593

Post by deadbabe »

famouswaffles wrote: post #514
deadbabe wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Guess what, I’m a researcher. I have published papers.

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

#594

Post by bluesnowmonkey »

> They don't know that the reason you price things the way you do is rooted in a competitive dynamic that never got written down anywhere.

So maybe you should write it down?

I see this going differently than they do. An exoskeleton that makes you 5% stronger is not a game changer. Companies that lean fully into agents won’t just be “humans, but a little better.” They’ll move orders of magnitude faster, make decisions in less time, do it ask more efficiently. It will be no contest.

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

#595

Post by ben_w »

sensanaty wrote: post #307
ben_w wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And just like a real employee, this makes it work worse. (Old study, I wonder if it holds up on newer models? https://arxiv.org/pdf/2402.14531 )

Interesting, I've actually found swearing at the dumbass bots to give better results, might just be the catharsis of telling it it's a dumbass though.

There's certainly catharsis, but I'm taking the opportunity to train myself to be less frustrated by apparently stupid responses in the hope it makes me a more effective communicator towards humans.

My worst experience of co-workers (and in contract work, customers) is when they treat me the way I used to treat ChatGPT. If I can make sure I myself am never like that, just by training myself to different behaviour through my use of the infinitely patient LLMs, all the better. :)

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

#596

Post by qudat »

jazz9k wrote: post #189
qudat wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trajectory hasn’t changed: they scaled generating code, a great feat, but someone has to apply higher level abstract thinking to make the tool useful. Running agents in a cron or having non SWEs use it will not last longer than a prototype. That will not change with scaling pattern matching algorithms.

This is true. AI won't replace software developers completely, but it will reduce the need for software developers in the long-run, making it harder to find a job. A few seniors+AI will be able to do the job of a much larger team. This is already starting to look like reality now. I can't imagine what we will see within 5 years.

I disagree. Agents can only write as fast as we can QA/code review. If there is swe displacement it’ll be small.

All these companies firing because of AI are using it as an excuse

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

#597

Post by [deleted] »

tlonny wrote: post #321
eCa wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's not augmentation, that's a completely different game Not saying that this comment is ai written, but this phrasing is the em-dash of 2026.

Look at his other comments - its textbook LLM slop. Its a fucking tragedy that people are letting their OpenClaws loose on HN but I can't say I'm surprised. I desperately need to find a good network of developers because I think the writing is on the wall for message boards like these...

[deleted]

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

#598

Post by entrox »

overgard wrote: post #495
entrox wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it bizarre? It is inevitable. After all, AI has not ruined creative professions, it merely disrupted and transformed them. And yes, I fully understand my whole comment here being snarky, but please bear with me. Let's rewind 4 years to this HN article titled "The AI Art Apocalypse": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32486133 and read some of the comments. > Actually all progress will definitely will have a…

> It is inevitable. Is it though? I agree the technology evolving is inevitable, but, the race/rush to throw as much money at scaling and marketing as possible before these things are profitable and before society is ready is not inevitable at all. It feels extremely forced. And the way it's being shoved into every product to juice usage numbers seems to agree with me that it's all premature and rushed and most peopl…

I believe you misunderstood the point of my comment, or rather I didn't make it clear enough. The quotes I quickly picked out feel like they represent a majority opinion on HN, namely that this is progress and disruption. I don't share that opinion.

My own gut feeling is that this sentiment comes out of a position of superiority and a definite lack of empathy. It is software engineers building the technology that is leading to job loss, sloppification of everything as well as second order effects like storage and RAM prices soaring because of the hype.

As such, I find it ironic to complain about being replaced. After all, your profession is the one responsible for all of this, so now please take a look in the mirror and take responsibility for the actions of the industry you choose to work in.

Personally, I think the current trajectory of AI is an overall net negative to society. I sincerely hope it all comes crashing down in another AI winter, but we'll see.

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

#599

Post by DiskoHexyl »

yourapostasy wrote: post #554
dogleash wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>My read of the recent discussion is that people assume that the work of far fewer number of elites will define the patterns for the future. Even if we assume that's true, what will prevent atrophy of the skillset among the elites with such a small pool of practitioners?

Money and fame. Lots of money and fame. There is no shortage of Olympic hopeful elite athletes every four years, despite the incredibly small pool of competitors at each Games. Same for musicians. This kind of Winner-Take-All Economics or Superstar Market is what capital wants in their ideal world in markets with near-zero marginal costs of distribution. Even if software creation in the long-term does not fall to thi…

And it mostly happens in government funded and/or commercially viable sports, with public schools where kids train for free, scholarships, numerous competitions etc. To gather those selected elites we take an enormous pool of aspiring athletes and support them from the ground up (usually with our taxes)

Where such support systems don’t exist you have a relatively shallow talent pool, and the best performers are a far cry from what could have been possible otherwise

Post reply on HN