| ▲ | HarlequinHair a day ago |
| I think the first parent post all this conversation originated from, pointed that LLMs are not groundbreaking inventions. If people use it to replace voice assistants or search engines, you can see how this new invention is not really adding anything you already hadn't. AIs in general are very useful, but apart from the campaign they did to change everything's name into AI (also well known algorithms and "old" machine learning), if you look at all the possible applications, LLMs are possibly the least useful of them. Especially if you take into account how much money they spent, and how much effort they put to shove it in your throat. If a technology is convenient for people, you shouldn't need to insist to make people use it. If it is convenient, people will use it in a natural way. |
|
| ▲ | ipsod a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| > If a technology is convenient for people, you shouldn't need to insist to make people use it. This is like the railroads, and the tracks have been laid. Because of the enormous cost, it can't be left to "hope they'll find it useful," and has to be pushed like crazy, or we're going to be left with a train system with no goods or passengers, and no path into the future. Personally, having AI as an intelligence I can call like it's a library from apps I build... and to help build those apps... I feel that the future is as bright as the sun. I've always believed in software, but I feel like a chef that's just discovered salt and butter. I don't know what it means for the world stage, but I believe that software is the highest art, and it's just had an incalculably massive buff. As an artist, I am stoked. The possibilities for creation of good things are limitless, and if you can't see that, I can't help you. However, I wouldn't necessarily invest in AI companies. I don't know how this all fits into the rest of the world, except that I believe in my own ability to make products, same as I ever did, but now with AI. |
| |
| ▲ | HarlequinHair 21 hours ago | parent [-] | | > This is like the railroads, and the tracks have been laid. Except that for railroads I don't need people to convince me about how/when/why it can be useful. Railroads came out to solve an issue we had (and then it evolved).
LLMs are not giving us any new solution, just different speed (better) and quality (worse) to solve things we co&ld already solve. It's basically the same concept as fast fashion.
Worse quality, more speed, possibly more economic.
You can change your wardrobe possibly every year, but you will never wear good quality clothes. Now you can write code at impressive speed, but it is worse in quality, and you need to review it more often than "normal" code. AI code should always be fully reviewed and put into the correct context to make it useful, otherwise long term problems will void short term benefits | | |
| ▲ | ipsod 19 hours ago | parent [-] | | Nobody convinced me AI was useful. At this point, nobody could convince me it wasn't - it's like going from whittling stuff out of wood to having a kitted-out fully-manned machine shop. It's clear from your words you lack experience and skill in this area - you've only got opinions. | | |
| ▲ | HarlequinHair 18 hours ago | parent [-] | | My "only" experience happen to be coding 5 days a week with agentic AI, plus reviews. Only because I do not share your point of view it doesn't mean I lack experience or skills. You are pretty fast at jumping at conclusions. | | |
| ▲ | ipsod 13 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I guess we might actually have similar feelings, except, you say "only speed", and "only economics". Only time and only money. As if those aren't two of the most valuable currencies on earth. | |
| ▲ | ipsod 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > You are pretty fast at jumping at conclusions. Yeah, because I can see some of my own thoughts and experience from a long time ago in your words, and my experience tells me loud and clear that they're outdated and wrong. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | david-gpu 21 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| If people use [the Internet] to replace [Sears catalogs] or [paper mail], you can see how this new invention is not really adding anything you already hadn't. |
| |
| ▲ | HarlequinHair 20 hours ago | parent [-] | | It would have been a good counter-example, if only internet wasn't:
- adding encryption
- removing processing time
- removing geography
- removing logistic issues
... and much more at a convenient price. They basically invented teleportation for sear catalogs and paper mail, can you see how this is different?
Also, Internet was built to solve a problem we had, and it solved it beautifully and at reasonable prices. I for sure can understand it introduced different issues, buy this is another topic. | | |
| ▲ | david-gpu 19 hours ago | parent [-] | | You can ask LLMs questions about an immense variety of subjects, and they can give you customized explanations to those questions. It is as if an acquaintance of yours had digested Wikipedia and tens of thousands of books and had infinite patience to help you understand whatever you are curious about. And while the answers are not going to be picture perfect every time, just like Wikipedia or a well-educated acquaintance, they will be generally very useful. I understand exactly what the Internet of the 90s did and did not do, because I was there to witness it myself. I had these same types of conversations with naysayers back then. Guess who was right? | | |
| ▲ | HarlequinHair 18 hours ago | parent [-] | | Maybe you have all the means to avoid sycophancy bias and other flaws LLMs have by design, this doesn't mean that everyone can use it the same way. The fact the you were right in a previous topic, doesn't grant you objective truth.
You have your strong opinions on AI, and that's ok.
Fortunately not everyone has to share the same idea. If you think LLMs can do better than you, feel free to use them in production and bring them to work with you, it's your choice.
Do not force others do the same, tho. |
|
|
|
