Facebook
Google
GitHub
Linkedin
ChatGPT
- Thread starter MisterBill2
- Start date
"Everything that's going to be invented has been invented."
Just go back 10 years and ask yourself if you could have predicted where we are today with LLMs.
I don't know what the ultimate capability will be, but I'm sure as heck we aren't there yet.
The main difference between now and 10 years ago is processing power and massive data storage. LLM's will always be token predictors. I'm pretty sure we will eventually have AGI but it won't be a LLM at the root processing core.
Not drinking the Kool-aid here
Baby steps.
This is probably the wrong thread for this. Sorry:
I hate it when I hear the word 'CODING' used in this context but that's mainly what kids have been taught instead of building a solid foundation for leaning computer programming using data structures, patterns and methods in abstract.
Coding is not programming. Programming is the process of solving problems using a computer. Sure, it's like learning how to type but it doesn't teach you how to write a decent resume.
With "AI", as we call it today, programming will still be a important job even if you write no code (using a traditional computer language). Things like LLM's are not programmers, they have access to a vast assortment of code (good, bad and ugly) and can use the vast training data to help build a pretty good starting point at common computer tasks where there are lots of examples to train on. It's not so good at solving problems using a computer when the problem is obscure, novel or deeply hardware low-level (physical interactions).
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/comp...-workers-replaced-120000411.html?guccounter=1
An AI tool is a dangerous tool in the hands of mentally vulnerable people:
The other day I was looking for where I had heard and seen a quote - "We are not descended from fearful men" - that I later discovered was uttered by Edward R. Murrow. It struck me enough at the time I heard it that I kept a vague memory of it. It jumped out at me once I learned more about it and I wanted to know where I had seen it.
I asked a couple AIs to help me find it. Grok came up empty even after I named several of the TV shows and movies I had watched recently that might have been the source. A different AI assured me it appeared on "Last Man Standing" and cited the season, episode and time stamp. Woohoo!, I thought. It made perfect sense. Trouble is, it was a lie. When I came back to tell the AI it was wrong, it agreed and gave up. No remorse whatsoever.
I remarked to a friend that an employee that lies to you without remorse should be fired immediately but he pointed out that an employee that can do what Grok does, for free, is worth keeping. Fair. But it certainly reinforces the "DON'T trust, and verify" approach you need to work with AI.
I asked a couple AIs to help me find it. Grok came up empty even after I named several of the TV shows and movies I had watched recently that might have been the source. A different AI assured me it appeared on "Last Man Standing" and cited the season, episode and time stamp. Woohoo!, I thought. It made perfect sense. Trouble is, it was a lie. When I came back to tell the AI it was wrong, it agreed and gave up. No remorse whatsoever.
I remarked to a friend that an employee that lies to you without remorse should be fired immediately but he pointed out that an employee that can do what Grok does, for free, is worth keeping. Fair. But it certainly reinforces the "DON'T trust, and verify" approach you need to work with AI.
https://www.404media.co/software-developers-say-ai-is-rotting-their-brains/
Developers who are told to use AI whether they like it or not, however, tell a different story. On Reddit, Hacker News and other places where people in software development talk to each other, more and more people are becoming disillusioned with the promise of code generated by large language models. Developers talk not just about how the AI output is often flawed, but that using AI to get the job done is often a more time consuming, harder, and more frustrating experience because they have to go through the output and fix its mistakes. More concerning, developers who use AI at work report that they feel like they are de-skilling themselves and losing their ability to do their jobs as well as they used to.
As astronaut Frank Borman put it, "a superior pilot uses his superior judgement to avoid situations which would require the use of his superior piloting skill".
Developers who are told to use AI whether they like it or not, however, tell a different story. On Reddit, Hacker News and other places where people in software development talk to each other, more and more people are becoming disillusioned with the promise of code generated by large language models. Developers talk not just about how the AI output is often flawed, but that using AI to get the job done is often a more time consuming, harder, and more frustrating experience because they have to go through the output and fix its mistakes. More concerning, developers who use AI at work report that they feel like they are de-skilling themselves and losing their ability to do their jobs as well as they used to.
As astronaut Frank Borman put it, "a superior pilot uses his superior judgement to avoid situations which would require the use of his superior piloting skill".
Elsewhere in the article (just before the paywall), they talk about how tech companies are using whatever savings they get (or think they get) by laying off people. Well, what do they expect? A lot of technology has been developed largely to permit more work to be done by fewer people. Expecting companies to continue employing the same amount of people when they aren't needed is naive and unrealistic -- and something they would almost never support if they have the option of not doing so. Lots of people hire lawn maintenance companies to maintain their yards. Do they go look for companies that still employee lots of people using scythes or even manual reel mowers so as to reward them for not doing the same job at less expense with fewer people by using powered lawnmowers? No. They look for the company that can do an acceptable job at the lowest price, which means exploiting technology as much as possible to minimize the amount of human labor involved. But when they leverage technology to pay fewer humans to do the same job, it's prudence, while when a company does the same thing, it's pure evil greed and nothing else. They seem to think that companies always have the option of simply keeping the same number of employees and just producing more output. That almost always happens to some degree, but it's usually at the margins. If there was market demand for significantly greater output, they would probably have already expanded to meet it. The new technology may let them lower their prices enough to result in some degree of greater demand, but again, it's at the margins.
The esc key should be a lot larger ... I'm just saying
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
asked Chatgpt to recommend some upgrades/modifications for my Akai MPC3000 | General Electronics Chat | 1 |
