4 ms·

I don't understand predictions like this. Even if I thought this technology will be as useful as it's hyped up to be (which I don't) I don't see how it would h

I don't understand predictions like this. Even if I thought this technology will be as useful as it's hyped up to be (which I don't) I don't see how it would have effects different from those of previous revolutionary technologies that have improved the human condition. I think the doomsayers on these LLMs would be the same folks predicting doom when agriculture was mechanized. When massive portions of the workforce toiled in agriculture, folks thought farm machines would lead to mass unemployment and social horror. Instead, world hunger has dropped, and massive portions of the workforce were freed up to do things like work on LLMs. Maybe the hand-wringing is different this time because privileged classes feel threatened.

876978095789789 4y ago
> I don't see how it would have effects different from those of previous revolutionary technologies that have improved the human condition. It will greatly reduce the demand for labor in many fields (off the top of my head: customer support, artists, any kind of writing or clerical work, and probably programmers and IT pros in general), and the benefit of this productivity gain will largely be reaped by the owners of LLMs and the companies using them in the form of higher profit margins. It's not at all clear that it will trickle down to the displaced workers. > privileged classes feel threatened Ironically, I actually believe a lot of the overly optimistic takes come from a point of privilege. Think the FAANG types making $250k a year, for whom everything in life has more or less worked out well, and who have difficulty envisioning a future where things don't just keep on working out well.