AI is different
antirez.com
AI is different
1–10 of 920 posts
Re: AI is different
#2I don't get how post GPT-5's launch we're still getting articles where the punchline is "what if these things replace a BUNCH of humans".
Re: AI is different
#3I don't get how post GPT-5's launch we're still getting articles where the punchline is "what if these things replace a BUNCH of humans".
what if they replace internet comments?
As a large language model developed by OpenAI I am unable to fulfill that request.
Re: AI is different
#4I don't get how post GPT-5's launch we're still getting articles where the punchline is "what if these things replace a BUNCH of humans".
People just want to feel special pointing a possibility, so in case it happens, they can then point towards their "insight".
Re: AI is different
#5I don't get how post GPT-5's launch we're still getting articles where the punchline is "what if these things replace a BUNCH of humans".
People just want to feel special pointing a possibility, so in case it happens, they can then point towards their "insight".
Or they are experts in one field and think that they have valuable insight into other fields they are not experts on.
Re: AI is different
#6I don't get how post GPT-5's launch we're still getting articles where the punchline is "what if these things replace a BUNCH of humans".
Salvatore is right about the fact that we have not seen the full story yet, LLMs are stalling/plateauing but active research is already ongoing to find different architectures and models.
And I think the effort here can be compared in scale to the Manhattan or Apollo projects, but there is also the potential for a huge backlash to the hype that was built up and created what is arguably a bubble, so this is a race against the clock.
I also think he is wrong about the markets reaction, markets are inherently good integrators and bad predictors, we should not expect to learn anything about the future by looking at stocks movements.
Re: AI is different
#7In 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 humans for a lot of important things. But as its capabilities improve, what do displaced humans transition to?
I don't think that we have a good answer to that. And we may need it sooner rather than later. I'd be more optimistic if I trusted our leadership more. But wise political leadership is not exactly a strong point for our country right now.
Re: AI is different
#8I don't get how post GPT-5's launch we're still getting articles where the punchline is "what if these things replace a BUNCH of humans".
Salvatore is right about the fact that we have not seen the full story yet, LLMs are stalling/plateauing but active research is already ongoing to find different architectures and models. And I think the effort here can be compared in scale to the Manhattan or Apollo projects, but there is also the potential for a huge backlash to the hype that was built up and created what is arguably a bubble, so this is a race aga…
> Salvatore is right about the fact that we have not seen the full story yet, LLMs are stalling/plateauing but active research is already ongoing to find different architectures and models.
They will need to be so different that any talk implying current LLMs eventually replaced humans will be like saying trees eventually replaced horses because the first cars were wooden.
> And I think the effort here can be compared in scale to the Manhattan or Apollo projects, but there is also the potential for a huge backlash to the hype that was built up and created what is arguably a bubble, so this is a race against the clock.
It's not useful to blindly compare scale. We're not approaching AI like the Manhattan or Apollo projects, we're approaching this like we did crypto, and ads, and other tech.
That's not to say nothing useful will come out of it, I think very amazing things will come out of it and already have... but none of them will resemble mass replacement of skilled workers.
We're already so focused on productization and typical tech distractions that this is nothing like those efforts.
(In fact thinking a bit more, I'd say this is like the Space Shuttle. We didn't try to make the best spacecraft for scientific exploration and hope later on it'd be profitable in other ways... instead we immediately saddled it with serving what the Air Force/DoD wanted and ended up doing everything worse.)
> I also think he is wrong about the markets reaction, markets are inherently good integrators and bad predictors, we should not expect to learn anything about the future by looking at stocks movements.
I agree, so it's wrong about the over half of punchline too.
Re: AI is different
#9I don't get how post GPT-5's launch we're still getting articles where the punchline is "what if these things replace a BUNCH of humans".
The amount of innovation in the last 6-8 months has been insane.
Re: AI is different
#10[dead]