| ▲ | dakolli 5 hours ago | |
Its because llm companies are literally building quasi slot machines, their UI interfaces support this notion, for instance you can run a multiplier on your output x3,x4,5, Like a slot machine. Brain fried llm users are behaving like gamblers more and more everyday (its working). They have all sorts of theories why one model is better than another, like a gambler does about a certain blackjack table or slot machine, it makes sense in their head but makes no sense on paper. Don't use these technologies if you can't recognize this, like a person shouldn't gamble unless they understand concretely the house has a statistical edge and you will lose if you play long enough. You will lose if you play with llms long enough too, they are also statistical machines like casino games. This stuff is bad for your brain for a lot of people, if not all. | ||
| ▲ | nextaccountic 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |
I agree with the notion, except that the models are indeed different Some day maybe they will converge into approximately the same thing but then training will stop making economic sense (why spend millions to have ~the same thing?) | ||
| ▲ | leptons 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |
100% agree with this take. As I find myself using AI to write software, it is looking like gambling. And it isn't helping stimulate my brain in ways that actually writing code does. I feel like my brain is starting to atrophy. I learn so much by coding things myself, and everything I learn makes me stronger. That doesn't happen with AI. Sure I skim through what the AI produced, but not enough to really learn from it. And the next time I need to do something similar, the AI will be doing it anyway. I'm not sure I like this rabbit hole we're all going down. I suspect it doesn't lead to good things. | ||