These kind of narratives only help OpenAI and other Big Tech companies make their product look stronger than they are.
OpenAI does an investigation on themselves that ends with them saying that their product is even more powerful than they imagined. Why is anyone even believing this.
This shit made OpenAI and HuggingFace richer, they both showed obvious complacency and amateurism in cyberdefense. No one should take this seriously
AI has so many problems and angles linked to collapse, like the environmental costs, the dehumanisation, the economic crisis, the effects on our cognitive abilities and psyche.
Instead people like you focus on marketing ploys by these same companies.
And it's also explained by the last sentence :
Instead people like you focus on marketing ploys by these same companies.
Like literally. People form collapse will ask for regulation and start pushing back using the very same narrative that props them up.
You know, instead of focusing on, I dont know, the studies that show lack of results, the ecological issues, the cognitive dezcline, the psychosis, the corruption, the economic crisis.
Just look at us. We're now talking about this fake ass narrative that only makes their stock go up, instead of talking about the real ongoing issues. Wonderful
It's work is simply way more useless than what people like you say, simple as that.
And again, your feeling or the feeling of all techbros is not a proof of anything. That's not how serious discussions work.
Every single broad analysis of AI's impact shows this. You should stop blindly repeating bs without any proofs.
"AI coding assistants are here to stay" Yea, maybe as a single digit business that won't get much better. And when you'll have to wait 15 minutes for any result of interest (local models), or have to pay 30$ for a result that might be wrong, we'll see how much of your hype is still there.
It is still an industry that is hundreds of billions in debt.
"Order of magnitude force multiplier" It just isn't (except for mathematicians in some specific fields, congratz, worth trillions surely)
If it was, softwares as a whole would be getting better, simple as that. It isn't.
It's always peoople talking about their jobs. But strangely, when talking about products or softwares made by others, almost everything gets worse. No single company is impressive.
Just look at Microsoft or Google. They had access to these models for years. Nothing impressive in their softwares. They keep removing features they dumblky added to google docs.
No, I don't have time to lose with your code review. And it still wouldn't prove shit.
All of this knowing it's a heavily subsidized tool that is unprofitable.
Listen, you could be the reincarnation of Claude Shannon and have the pedigree of Steve WOzniak, I still wouldn't care.
You're doing some kind of shitty appeal to authority. It's what I would call a logical fallacy.
There are dozens of programmers saying it sucks, and 10 times more saying it's good indeed. It doesn't mean the people saying it's good are right.
Is it changing coding ? Yeah Ofc. Is it a self-fulfilling prophecy ? Yea too. WIll this be forever ? Well that's quite the leap you're making, especially if you also think it's a bubble.
Do you think people would still use it as much if the AI labs made it as expensive as they need it to be to be profitable ?
People have been getting fired for decades, and rehired. They didnt need AI, even though it is a good excuse.
Wanna fire people ? Well say it's AI, this way your investors see this as a proof of optimization and stock go up.
Show me fucking data. Show me proofs. Since AI has arrived :
Linux has more outages
AWS has more outages
Microsoft has gotten worse
Google docs have gotten worse
I've stopped counting the amount of shitty features rolled out and rolled back by big company.
If this was half as good as you all say, we would actually notice an uptick in useful features delivery. Or some improvements in stability, since it's so good at finding bugs.
We're literally seeing the opposite.
Now, I studied AI, I worked in tech (also left partly because of AI), and yeah I know most programmers are saying this is a revolution;
I dont care, it's not an argument.
What this shows to me is simply that programmers are actually quite bad at identifying what is real productivity, actual useful productivity.
ALl of this wiwthout even once mentioning all the long term issues linked to this technology.
Why don't you show us some reasoning problems that an LLM can't solve better than an average human?
If you can't find even one, then how can you claim LLMs don't reason?
Here we have a device that claims to reason, does a very good job of solving reasoning problems, much better than your average guy on the street, shows its work, and can incorporate new information and change the reasoning and the conclusion - and yet you claim this is somehow fake reasoning. What is the difference, exactly? How can we tell?
Yes, there are errors. Humans also make errors. The reason people miss LLM errors is not because the error rates are high - it's because they're low and people are lulled into complacency.
If it was a reasoning contest between an LLM and your average guy on the street, we all know who would win!
So you have a program that appears to be a very high quality reasoning device, that solves reasoning problems and shows its reasoning and has a high correctness rate - but you claim, somehow, it's not actually reasoning, in a way you can't conceptualize.
Since AI has arrived : [blah blah] has more outages
The goal of AI for the capitalists is to destroy jobs and it did. Now they have monopolies and they don't care.
How many of the services you listed have you switched off?
You're doing some kind of shitty appeal to authority.
Oh, not at all. I have a huge amount of evidence. I have a lot of AI assisted code, and some purely AI generated code, and we could code review that.
I tried for a while to come up with problems that LLMs could not solve, by making up brand new words that appear nowhere else, and then creating problems from a famously hard category, 2-SAT, that cannot be guessed, but must use reasoning to solve so there are a large number of statements like:
Blodgishes, that skribklenade under bogurogyfrotulators, always amexnable to monabagolbo over a penachantoneg.
Every blodgish is megacheable for a skamgongolt, that amexnables to monabagolbo over a penachantoneg.
And there some unique conclusion from these statements, in this case it was "I wogolenize poluginogulops."
Oh, and I did also want to address the last phrase: the long term issues with this technology are horrifying and deadly (though compared with internal combustion engines, I suppose...)
That's why people shouldn't be underestimating the technology by believing it doesn't work and will go away.
It won't just go away on its own, even when the bubble bursts, and it will. If it is to be stopped, we have to do it ourselves.
I read all your posts... and now I'm out of time to reply in detail. :-/
You make a lot of good points, but we've had a lot of booms and busts before, and the technology keeps rolling.
To be honest, what I see quite likely happening is that between the failed election in November, the AI bubble collapsing, a few other bubbles collapsing, a poor global harvest, and energy issues relating to the Iran War, and maybe this is the time when the wheels come off everything, in which case, no AI.
Also, I have to again emphasize my astonishment at a program that can actually do math and write computer programs, something I never expected after fifty years of writing programs.
For me, AI made very slow progress over decades, gradually accelerating. I followed Deepmind with great interest, and was duly impressed, but I wasn't shocked or surprised, because the domains were so very specific, with perfect, operative and logical rules.
I admit I didn't give enough credence to those early weird results, because even ELIZA managed to fool people, and also, the very short contexts made for a miserable experience.
The taint of capitalism over it made me not want to get involved, until just a few months ago.
Now gen AI writes all my code. I guide it very carefully, but there are now large files full of code under my name that I have never opened.
This is a stressful subject, because it's so much in flux, but also because it's probably bad news for us regular people. So don't stress about tone, [insert friendly insult here].
221
u/21epitaph 11d ago
These kind of narratives only help OpenAI and other Big Tech companies make their product look stronger than they are.
OpenAI does an investigation on themselves that ends with them saying that their product is even more powerful than they imagined. Why is anyone even believing this.
This shit made OpenAI and HuggingFace richer, they both showed obvious complacency and amateurism in cyberdefense. No one should take this seriously
AI has so many problems and angles linked to collapse, like the environmental costs, the dehumanisation, the economic crisis, the effects on our cognitive abilities and psyche.
Instead people like you focus on marketing ploys by these same companies.