641–650 of 827 posts
the fanboying for this dudes opinion is insane.
edit: a lot of the comments giving praise on YouTube look like bots...
This got me thinking about something… Isn’t an LLM basically a program that is impossible to virus scan and therefore can never be safely given access to any capable APIs? For example: I’m a nice guy and spend billions on training LLMs. They’re amazing and free and I hand out the actual models for you all to use however you want. But I’ve trained it very heavily on a specific phrase or UUID or some other activation k…
This is what mechanistic interpretability studies are trying to achieve, and it's not yet realistically possible for a general case.
Karpathy and his peer group are some of the most elitist and anti social people who have ever lived. I wonder how history will remember them.
This got me thinking about something… Isn’t an LLM basically a program that is impossible to virus scan and therefore can never be safely given access to any capable APIs? For example: I’m a nice guy and spend billions on training LLMs. They’re amazing and free and I hand out the actual models for you all to use however you want. But I’ve trained it very heavily on a specific phrase or UUID or some other activation k…
okay I’m practicing my new spiel: this focus on coding is the wrong level of abstraction coding is no longer the problem. the problem is getting the right context to the coding agent. this is much, much harder “vibe coding” is the new “horseless carriage” the job of the human engineer is “context wrangling”
We have math notation for maths, diagrams for circuits, plans for houses, etc etc. Would hate to have to give long paragraphs of "English" to my house builder and watch what the result could be. Feels like being a lawyer at this point. English can be appropriate and now we also have that in our toolbox.
Describing context at the abstraction level and accuracy you care about has always been the issue. The context of what matters though as you grow and the same system has to deal with more requirements at once together IMV is always the challenge in ANY engineering discipline.
Great talk, thanks for putting it online so quickly. I liked the idea of making the generation / verification loop go brrr, and one way to do this is to make verification not just a human task, but a machine task, where possible. Yes, I am talking about formal verification, of course! That also goes nicely together with "keeping the AI on a tight leash". It seems to clash though with "English is the new programming l…
But maybe I just don't understand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This thread perfectly captures what Karpathy was getting at. We're witnessing a fundamental shift where the interface to computing is changing from formal syntax to natural language. But you can see people struggling to let go of the formal foundations they've built their careers on.
> We're witnessing a fundamental shift where the interface to computing is changing from formal syntax to natural language. People have said this every year since the 1950's. No, it is not happening. LLMs won't help. Writing code is easy, it's understanding the problem domain is hard. LLMs won't help you understand the problem domain in a formal manner. (In fact they might make it even more difficult.)
The image of a bunch of children in a room gleefully playing with their computers is horror movie type stuff, but because it's in a white room with plants and not their parent's basement with the lights off, it's somehow a wonderful future. Karpathy and his peer group are some of the most elitist and anti social people who have ever lived. I wonder how history will remember them.
I think this is a brilliant talk and truly captures the "zeitgeist" of our times. He sees the emergent patterns arising as software creation is changing. I am writing a hobby app at the moment and I am thinking about its architecture in a new way now. I am making all my model structures comprehensible so that LLMs can see the inside semantics of my app. I merely provide a human friendly GUI over the top to avoid the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is why I call all this AI stuff BS. Using a formal language is a feature, not a bug. It is a cornerstone of all human engineering and scientific activity and is the _reason_ why these disciplines are successful. What you are describing (ie. ditching formal and using natural language) is moving humanity back towards magical thinking, shamanism and witchcraft.
> Using a formal language is a feature, not a bug. It is a cornerstone of all human engineering and scientific activity and is the _reason_ why these disciplines are successful A similar argument was also made by Dijkstra in this brief essay here [1] - which is timely to this debate of why "english is the new programming language" is not well-founded. I quote a brief snippet here: "The virtue of formal texts is that…