Live data from Hacker News

Simulacrum of Knowledge Work

blog.happyfellow.dev

71–80 of 97 posts

Re: Simulacrum of Knowledge Work

#71

With AI, we‘re cargo-culting understanding. We‘re reproducing the surface of having understood something, but we‘re robbing ourselves the time and effort to truly do it.

AI can do things on its own, without you understanding them yes. But if you are trying to understand something well, there is no better tool for helping you than AI.

I think that AI can sometimes help a lot. But I think doing it correctly is a tightrope and one misstep can easily have terrible results.

First issue is this result from reinforcement learning that tells you that you really want to be doing a large fraction of stuff stuff on policy when possible.

It's true of RL agents, but I think it's actually just a universal learning result that applies to humans. Sure you could ask AI to solve a difficult math problem step by step, and what it can expose you to is tricks you had no idea about and the general method of solving such a problem.

But there is something about the work that you produced without external influence (the on policy epispde) that is sort of irreplaceably important.

The second is that there is something about the speed and conciseness of information AI presents to you. It seems like a super power but there are two problems I have with it.

A) It's too fast. Unless you are artificially slowing yourself down by reading like one sentence per minute there is something about how quickly all you want gets presented to you that seems to have a strong in one ear out the other sort of effect. You need to slow down. You need to appreciate the details.

B) It's also often too consise. There is something about doing research yourself that lets you stumble upon something new that you might not have thought was helpful. Lots of times I've found lots of amazing nuggets on missteps and tangents.

There are more issues as well, but these are the major two I get concerned about. Like you need to be cognizant of the work not being done when you are using AI to do research. And imo it's deeply problematic for young students who have literally never done the hard work of trying to answer questions themselves. Because they might not realize the problem.

Re: Simulacrum of Knowledge Work

#72
post #52

With AI, we‘re cargo-culting understanding. We‘re reproducing the surface of having understood something, but we‘re robbing ourselves the time and effort to truly do it.

i been telling my coworker this who's only use case he can conjure up with AI is simply "im going to give claude snowflake cortex, our integration code, all our documentation, jira tickets and its gonna make everything so much better. we'll be able to ask him anything and get the answer" and he's just lost the plot because there wasn't much of a plot. Sci-fi's infused him with how great it would be to have something…

> im going to give claude snowflake cortex, our integration code, all our documentation, jira tickets and its gonna make everything so much better. we'll be able to ask him anything and get the answer

This is actually a good idea because it's a very cheap way to build your own industrial-strength search engine. We've forgotten how cool search engines are because Google's is so shit now.

(Although you don't need Claude, you can self-host this with minimal effort now.)

Re: Simulacrum of Knowledge Work

#73
post #67

What if subatomic particles are actually whole universes, and their properties are a reflection of... what kind of peoples dominated, conquered their universe, and what kind of automation was left running after them themselves were gone. Some kinds of entropy harvesting automata that perpetually self build and become everything in their spacetime. We're creating forces bigger than ourselves, and we may reach a point…

I don't totally understand, but I like where you're going with this. I picture a cosmological history, the rise and fall of billions of subatomic universes and civilizations, many of them consumed by their own autonomous pseudo-intelligent technologies for better or worse, which on a macro scale are behaviors of particles. We're currently working on our particle, making collective decisions that will affect the super-universe we're a part of, in a tiny but significant way.

Re: Simulacrum of Knowledge Work

#74
post #52

With AI, we‘re cargo-culting understanding. We‘re reproducing the surface of having understood something, but we‘re robbing ourselves the time and effort to truly do it.

i been telling my coworker this who's only use case he can conjure up with AI is simply "im going to give claude snowflake cortex, our integration code, all our documentation, jira tickets and its gonna make everything so much better. we'll be able to ask him anything and get the answer" and he's just lost the plot because there wasn't much of a plot. Sci-fi's infused him with how great it would be to have something…

>i look around and it feels like everyone is nerfing themselves

>this clearly has visible impacts on how we engage with each other

> there's something there that I'm noticing and don't have the words for.

Welcome to ASI takeoff!

Re: Simulacrum of Knowledge Work

#75
post #52

With AI, we‘re cargo-culting understanding. We‘re reproducing the surface of having understood something, but we‘re robbing ourselves the time and effort to truly do it.

i been telling my coworker this who's only use case he can conjure up with AI is simply "im going to give claude snowflake cortex, our integration code, all our documentation, jira tickets and its gonna make everything so much better. we'll be able to ask him anything and get the answer" and he's just lost the plot because there wasn't much of a plot. Sci-fi's infused him with how great it would be to have something…

[dead]

Re: Simulacrum of Knowledge Work

#76

It's a funny thing to write, like an article in an old newspaper that aged quickly. I suspect that this will be wildly out of date within 2-3 years.

There is this belief that in 2-3 years AI will be much better and all the gripes people have with AI use today will be solved. Honestly, personally, I think that optimism will age poorly. But to say it out loud at work or post publicly probably hurts my career prospects.

Re: Simulacrum of Knowledge Work

#77

"How do you know the output is good without redoing the work yourself?" Verifying the correctness of solutions is often much easier than finding correct solutions yourself. Examples: Sudoku and most practical problems in just about any field. - "The training doesn't evaluate 'is the answer true' or "is the answer useful.'" Lets pretend RLVF does not exist to give this argument a chance. Then, while the training loop…

"Verifying the correctness of solutions is often much easier than finding correct solutions yourself."

Honestly, this has not been my experience at all. Defining what a good solution looks like is most of the battle in Operational Research. But, trying to be constructive, maybe we have identified a sort of diving line between areas where AI is more vs. less helpful.

Re: Simulacrum of Knowledge Work

#78

With AI, we‘re cargo-culting understanding. We‘re reproducing the surface of having understood something, but we‘re robbing ourselves the time and effort to truly do it.

>> With AI, we‘re cargo-culting understanding

We're cargo culting "the manager view". Like the critic you can read on Bret Devereaux's blog about Game Of Thrones having been written from an elite's point of view, it's utopian and sounds good ... for the elites, the people who benefit from the hard work they never have to do themselves. But like any elite bubble wildly disconnected from reality, this one will fall bad. Maybe French revolution bad, when the answer to the masses of unemployed "displaced" by AI screaming "we can't get a piece of bread to eat" is "let them eat cake instead".

Re: Simulacrum of Knowledge Work

#79

The article asserts that the quality of human knowledge work was easier to judge based on proxy measures such as typos and errors, and that the lack of such "tells" in AI poses a problem. I don't know if I agree with either assertion… I've seen plenty of human-generated knowledge work that was factually correct, well-formatted, and extremely low quality on a conceptual level. And AI signatures are now easy for people…

[dead]

Re: Simulacrum of Knowledge Work

#80

I find AI code usually looks worse than it actually is. It's overly verbose, confusing, and littered with fallbacks that mean that if something goes wrong it falls through a million layers of try/catch and moves the stack trace somewhere completely unrelated to where the error actually happened, but in terms of the actual functionality it works much better than any similar-looking code written by a human would.

Such code as you describe is still bad code, though, because it’s difficult to reason about it, both for humans and LLMs.
Post reply on HN