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

AI is different

antirez.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

631–640 of 920 posts

Re: AI is different

#631

Post by immibis »

Joeri wrote: post #341
schneems wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few months ago I saw one driverless car maybe every three days. Now I see roughly 3-5 every day. I get that it’s taken a long time and a lot of hype that hasn’t panned out. But once the tech works and it’s just about juicing the scale then things shift rapidly. Even if you think “oh that’s the next generation’s problem” if there is a chance you’re wrong, or if you want to be kind to the next generation: now is the…

UBI could easily become a poverty trap, enough to keep living, not enough to have a shot towards becoming an earner because you’re locked out of opportunities. I think in practice it is likely to turn out like “basic” in The Expanse, with people hoping to win a lottery to get a shot at having a real job and building a decent life for themselves. If no UBI is installed there will be a hard crash while everyone figures…

That's way better than the present situation where they just die, though. It's at least a start.

Re: AI is different

#632

Post by thegrim33 »

gdubs wrote: post #622

AI has been improving at a very rapid pace, which means that a lot of people have really outdated priors. I see this all the time online where people are dismissive about AI in a way that suggests it's been a while since they last checked-in on the capabilities of models. They wrote off the coding ability of ChatGPT on version 3.5, for instance, and have missed all the advancements that have happened since. Or they t…

To play devil's advocate, how is your argument not a 'no true scottsman' argument? As in, "oh, they had a negative view of X, well that's of course because they weren't testing the new and improved X2 model which is different". Fast forward a year .. "Oh, they have a negative view on X2, well silly them, they need to be using the Y24 model, that's where it's at, the X2 model isn't good anymore". Fast forward a year .. ad infinitum.

Are the models that exist today a "true scottsman" for you?

Re: AI is different

#633

Post by immibis »

btilly wrote: post #7

In every technology wave so far, we've disrupted many existing jobs. However we've also opened up new kinds of jobs. And, because it is easier to retrain humans than build machines for those jobs, we wound up with more and better jobs. This is the first technology wave that doesn't just displace humans, but which can be trained to the new job opportunities more easily than humans can. Right now it can't replace human…

The opening of new jobs has been causally unlinked from the closing of old jobs - especially when you take the quantity into consideration. There was a well of stuff people wanted to do, that they couldn't do because they were busy doing the boring stuff. But now that well of good new jobs is running dry, which is why we see people picking up 3 really shit jobs to make ends meet. There will be a point where new jobs do not open at all, and we should probably plan for that.

Re: AI is different

#634

Post by mmmore »

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #352
mmmore wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a thoughtful post related to your lump of labor point: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/TkWCKzWjcbfGzdNK5/applying-t... What economists have taken seriously the premise that AI will be able to do any job a human can more efficiently and fully thought through it's implications? i.e. a society where (human) labor is unnecessary to create goods/provide services and only capital and natural resources are required.…

If it is decades or centuries off, is it really understudied? LLMs are so far from "AI will be able to do any job a human can more efficiently and fully" that we aren't even in the same galaxy.

If AI that can fully replace humans is 25 years off, preparing society for its impacts is still one of the most important things to ensure that my children (which I have not had yet) live a prosperous and fulfilling life. The only other things of possibly similar import are preventing WWIII, and preventing a pandemic worse than COVID.

I don't see how AGI could be centuries off (at least without some major disruption to global society). If computers that can talk, write essays, solve math problems, and code are not a warning sign that we should be ready, then what is?

Re: AI is different

#635

Post by nprateem »

tbrownaw wrote: post #602
morsecodist wrote: post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree that it is because of the "quality" of the video. The issue with AI art is that it lacks intentional content. I think people like art because it is a sort of conversation between the creator and the viewer. It is interesting because it has a consistent perspective. It is possible AI art could one day be indistinguishable but for people to care about it I feel they would need to lie and say it was made b…

> The issue with AI art is that it lacks intentional content. I think people like art because it is a sort of conversation between the creator and the viewer. Intent is in the eye of the beholder.

The trouble with AI shit is it's all contaminated by association.

I was looking on YT earlier for info on security cameras. It's easy to spot the AI crap: under 5 minutes and just stock video in the preview or photos.

What value could there be in me wasting time to see if the creators bothered to add quality content if they can't be bothered to show themselves in front of the lens?

What an individual brings is a unique brand. I'm watching their opinion which carries weight based on social signals and their catalogue etc.

Generic AI will always lack that until it can convincingly be bundled into a persona... only then the cycle will repeat: search for other ways to separate the lazy, generic content from the meaningful original stuff.

Re: AI is different

#636

Post by andsoitis »

azemetre wrote: post #626
m4nu3l wrote: post #621

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In economics, you aren't necessarily creating wealth just because your final output has value. The value of the final good or service has to be higher than the inputs for you to be creating wealth. I could take a functioning boat and scrap it, sell the scrap metal that has value. However, I destroyed wealth because the boat was worth more. Even if you are creating wealth, but the inputs have better uses and can creat…

This isn't related to what I was commenting on where the other poster came across as not seeing government by the governed as having economic worth.

Synthesizing between you two’s thoughts, extrapolating somewhat:

- human individuals create wealths

- groups of humans can create kinds of wealth that isn’t possible for a single indovidual. This can be a wide variety of associations: companies, project teams, governments, etc.

- governments (formal or less formal) create the playing field for individuals and groups of individuals to create wealth

Re: AI is different

#637

Post by nprateem »

ninetyninenine wrote: post #545
morsecodist wrote: post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree that it is because of the "quality" of the video. The issue with AI art is that it lacks intentional content. I think people like art because it is a sort of conversation between the creator and the viewer. It is interesting because it has a consistent perspective. It is possible AI art could one day be indistinguishable but for people to care about it I feel they would need to lie and say it was made b…

[flagged]

It's obviously not AI written.

Re: AI is different

#638

Post by CPLX »

gdubs wrote: post #622

AI has been improving at a very rapid pace, which means that a lot of people have really outdated priors. I see this all the time online where people are dismissive about AI in a way that suggests it's been a while since they last checked-in on the capabilities of models. They wrote off the coding ability of ChatGPT on version 3.5, for instance, and have missed all the advancements that have happened since. Or they t…

I agree with you. I am a perpetual cynic about new technology (and a GenXer so multiply that by two) and I have deeply embraced AI in all parts of my business and basically am engaging with it all day for various tasks from helping me compare restaurant options to re-tagging a million contact records in salesforce.

It’s incredibly powerful and will just clearly be useful. I don’t believe it’s going to replace intelligence or people but it’s just obviously a remarkable tool.

But I think at least part of the dynamic is that the SV tech hype booster train has been so profoundly full of shit for so long that you really can’t blame people for skepticism. Crypto was and is just a giant and elaborate grift, to name one example. Also guys like Altman are clearly overstating the current trajectory.

The dismissive response does come with some context attached.

Re: AI is different

#639

Post by cs702 »

The OP is spot-on about this:

If AI technology continues to improve and becomes capable of learning and executing more tasks on its own, this revolution is going to be very unlike the past ones.

We don't how if or how our current institutions and systems will be able to handle that.

Re: AI is different

#640

Post by nikolayasdf123 »

mattnewton wrote: post #17
aurareturn wrote: post #16

We are not there, yet, but if AI could replace a sizable amount of workers, the economic system will be put to a very hard test. Moreover, companies could be less willing to pay for services that their internal AIs can handle or build from scratch. There will be fewer very large companies in terms of human size. There will be many more companies that are much smaller because you don't need as many workers to do the s…

Maybe, or 300 of those engineers will be working for 3 new companies while the other 600 struggle to find gainful employment, even after taking large pay cuts, as their skillsets are replaced rather than augmented. It’s way too early to call afaict

more like 300 working, 60,000,000 struggle
Post reply on HN