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

Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

superuserdone.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 118 posts

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#71

Post by iugtmkbdfil834 »

ttoinou wrote: post #35
PedroBatista wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can be. Because most automations never capture the complete scope of the job/task ( not even close ). Just like neurons, if you don't use it you lose it and when the inevitable problems come, nobody knows the why, the how and the what. At that point someone smart would incorporate all those real costs and opportunity loses on the "automating everything" equation. But they usually don't. Of course automating tasks…

I agree with that, and that’s why it’s better to ask an AI and improve your prompt, instead of hiring a human that will disappear and you will loose all institutional knowledge

^^;

I chuckled. Institutional prompt will disappear so much faster than you imagine.

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#72

Post by jmoggr »

pron wrote: post #63
bilater wrote: post #30

I just don't understand why people are incapable of extrapolating. AI can't do this blah blah, my brother in spaghetti monster, have you seen the curve? ChatGPT launched in November, 2022. Opus in December last year. Do you see where this is going? AI may be a tool and add 50 IQ points to a 100 IQ person today but what happens when its adding 10000 IQ points. The 100 base doesn't quite matter as much does it? What do…

> I just don't understand why people are incapable of extrapolating. I guess it's a matter of education. People with a mathematics or computer science background know that unless the dynamics of a process are known to be linear, extrapolation is usually wrong. Since we don't know that the dynamics here are linear and have every reason to believe they aren't, extrpolation is unlikely to teach us anything valuable.

> and have every reason to believe they aren't

What reason? To me recursive self improvement seems credible, it's just a question of when. It seems obvious that given RSI, trend lines will be at least linear.

The disagreement could just be about if RSI is currently meaningfully happening, but that seems very difficult to tell given the lack of public data.

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#73

Post by AngryData »

jmoggr wrote: post #62
AngryData wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there demand for 10000 iq intellegence to fund its construction if we already have +100 iq AI? You are assuming there will be demand that scales as fast as technology can to fund its continued fast pace development.

> Is there demand for 10000 iq intellegence Yes. If it looks like 10000 iq is possible, then money will be thrown at whoever is most likely to achieve it first, and whoever has the most intelligent models right now strongly predicts who will be first. This is driven by the belief that whoever gets to 10000 iq first will likely dominate the majority of all economic activity, since it will be more efficient to trade wi…

People with money to invest will throw money at it to build it, but who is the customer base after that? So one guy eventually controls the stock market, why would I as a human want anything to do with that market? Why would I invest my earning into sustaining a machine that ideally is extracting every cent possible without leeway and funneling it up the pyramid? Unless I start at the top, ill never really go meaningfully higher.

Instead I can spend far less to use my 200 iq machine that already exceeds everything I could ever want. Im not ever going to personally fund a war of intellegence against other intellegences so anything more is of marginal value. The same reason I don't own a 2,000 horsepower truck or tractor, there are almost no uses for me to want it.

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#74

Post by encomiast »

jmoggr wrote: post #68
encomiast wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ChatGPT launched in November, 2022. Opus in December last year. Do you see where this is going? Maybe this is tongue-in-cheek, but in case it's not. No, nobody does. Consider that a person in their lifetime could have seen the Wright Brothers first flight in 1903, then the first jet engine in 1939, then commercial jet travel in the 1950s. That is an amazing 50 years for air travel. If you were living in 1950 and we…

I think it's credible to believe that that a system which is able to meaningfully improve it's own intelligence will lead to a far weirder world than the one imagined by the article. The parent comment could be interpreted as frustration from a lack of imagination about how weird the future could be. Perhaps we're not at the recursive self improvement yet, but it seems increasingly naive to believe that it isn't poss…

Of course you might be right. But if we look at our past ability to predict the future by extrapolating from the present and recent past, you might also say it is naive to think that _this time_ is somehow different, that this time the future is clear.

Also, I think you've set up a straw man. I haven't seen anyone arguing that this future isn't possible. What I see is resistance to the idea that we can have any certainty about the future by drawing a straight line from the past.

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#75

Post by ttoinou »

skydhash wrote: post #53
ttoinou wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with that, and that’s why it’s better to ask an AI and improve your prompt, instead of hiring a human that will disappear and you will loose all institutional knowledge

The risk of hiring a hunan is easy enough to manage. Ensure that the process is documented and new hires are trained. Any disturbance by someone leavingg is then smoothed out in the long term. Can you show us how it’s better to use an AI to ensure steadiness over a long period of time?

Ah yes of course, all companies can afford to hire 5 people for one job to smoothen out the loss of information by employee churn

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#76

Post by bilater »

AngryData wrote: post #54
bilater wrote: post #30

I just don't understand why people are incapable of extrapolating. AI can't do this blah blah, my brother in spaghetti monster, have you seen the curve? ChatGPT launched in November, 2022. Opus in December last year. Do you see where this is going? AI may be a tool and add 50 IQ points to a 100 IQ person today but what happens when its adding 10000 IQ points. The 100 base doesn't quite matter as much does it? What do…

Is there demand for 10000 iq intellegence to fund its construction if we already have +100 iq AI? You are assuming there will be demand that scales as fast as technology can to fund its continued fast pace development.

The demand for frontier intelligence is basically infinite. The frontier doesn't just complete a task more effectively, it creates new tasks and new problems and new solutions. It grows the pie exponentially. It's like looking at the internet the first time and trying to imagine the economy that will be built using it: social media, YouTube, Online job boards, Blogs etc.

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#77

Post by pron »

jmoggr wrote: post #72
pron wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I just don't understand why people are incapable of extrapolating. I guess it's a matter of education. People with a mathematics or computer science background know that unless the dynamics of a process are known to be linear, extrapolation is usually wrong. Since we don't know that the dynamics here are linear and have every reason to believe they aren't, extrpolation is unlikely to teach us anything valuable.

> and have every reason to believe they aren't What reason? To me recursive self improvement seems credible, it's just a question of when. It seems obvious that given RSI, trend lines will be at least linear. The disagreement could just be about if RSI is currently meaningfully happening, but that seems very difficult to tell given the lack of public data.

Because most systems in nature and society, including technological progress, aren't linear.

It's certainly plausible that improvements will continue, but the pace is completely unpredictable. It's also plausible that the training material is polluted and progress will not continue. I'm just saying that predicting the rate of technological progress is not easy, and historically, it's rarely been smooth in the long run.

There are many complicating technical factors, but also non-technical ones. Technological improvement in the short term will not necessarily yield commensurate economic gains, in which case, investment may not grow enough to sustain the progress.

As for the recursive part, currently it's either hypothetical or based on too few data points. Not saying it won't happen, but it's far from being the only plausible trajectory.

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#78

Post by mythrwy »

bilater wrote: post #30

I just don't understand why people are incapable of extrapolating. AI can't do this blah blah, my brother in spaghetti monster, have you seen the curve? ChatGPT launched in November, 2022. Opus in December last year. Do you see where this is going? AI may be a tool and add 50 IQ points to a 100 IQ person today but what happens when its adding 10000 IQ points. The 100 base doesn't quite matter as much does it? What do…

The internet doesn't have 10000 IQ points though. So where will it get the knowledge to be that smart?

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#79

Post by krapp »

Rendello wrote: post #69
pm90 wrote: post #22

Normies just don’t understand what all is involved in running and evolving a production system. They think all programmers do is write code. Of course they believe that AI could replace programmers. My in laws smugly asked me what I would be doing for work since AI would take away all the programming jobs and I said its not gonna happen and they laughed in derision.

> they laughed in derision It's crazy how defensive (offensive) people can get when you're into programming/math/whatever. Almost like "I don't understand your world, I don't want to, and I hate it and hope you fail". https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/what-its-like

[flagged]

Re: Give Smart People the Tools to Do Smart Things

#80

Post by iugtmkbdfil834 »

jmye wrote: post #21
simianwords wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Automating _my_ job is toxic. Automating other people’s and being employed as a software developer is wholesome chungus moment.

[flagged]

Not parent, but responding as I have an interest in languages and expression across cohorts. Short answer: not typically.
Post reply on HN