5 ms·

But that is the exact problem with AI - 99% of the time it's good, so your skills atrophy, but then there's that one percent of the time it decides the reflecti

But that is the exact problem with AI - 99% of the time it's good, so your skills atrophy, but then there's that one percent of the time it decides the reflective side of that 18-wheeler is the sun and drives you into it. That's very different from, say, a compiler, which as a programmer I completely trust to turn my source code into machine code accurately.

tikhonj 3y ago
> completely trust to turn my source code into machine code accurately Say hello to undefined behavior :) Appropriately enough, much of the reason undefined behavior is a consistent problem is exactly the same—it can do something reasonable 99% of the time and then totally screw you over out of nowhere.
- Jensson 3y ago
  Undefined behavior is a defined thing, you know about it so you can avoid it if you want, or look up what the compiler you use does in that case to see if it is useful to you. No such thing for a black box AI model.
BeetleB 3y ago
You're just mirroring the parent example. Prior to AI (or even computers), this was a problem. I used to be a more conventional engineering guy. We do a ton of calculus to get our degree. My first job - you just didn't need calculus (although all the associated courses in school used it to develop the theory). As a result, the one offs (less than once a year), when a problem did come up where calculus knowledge was helpful, they couldn't do the task and would go to that one guy (me) who still remembered calculus. BTW, I guarantee all the employees there got A's on their calculus courses.
- hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
  > You're just mirroring the parent example. Prior to AI (or even computers), this was a problem. Not at all, and your argument isn't the same thing. The problem with current AI, which is very different from past forms of automation, is that, essentially, its failure mode is undefined. Past forms of automation, for example, did not "hallucinate" seemingly correct but false answers. Even taking your own example, it was obvious to your colleagues that they didn't know how to get the answer. So they did the correct thing - they went to someone who knew how to do it. What they did not do, and which is what most current AI solutions will do, is just "wing it" with a solution that is wrong but looks correct to those without more expertise.
  - williamcotton 3y ago
    “Since when is failure mode being undefined a new thing?” - C programmer
    - hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
      This is the same bad argument made in a sibling comment. Undefined behavior in C is actually strictly defined: if you want to avoid undefined behavior, don't do stuff the spec specifically says results in undefined behavior, like deference a null pointer. Writing up a set of rules to guard against undefined behavior (which is a primary job of a C developer) is simply not possible with an LLM.

tikhonj 3y ago

> completely trust to turn my source code into machine code accurately Say hello to undefined behavior :) Appropriately enough, much of the reason undefined behavior is a consistent problem is exactly the same—it can do something reasonable 99% of the time and then totally screw you over out of nowhere.

Jensson 3y ago
Undefined behavior is a defined thing, you know about it so you can avoid it if you want, or look up what the compiler you use does in that case to see if it is useful to you. No such thing for a black box AI model.

BeetleB 3y ago

You're just mirroring the parent example. Prior to AI (or even computers), this was a problem. I used to be a more conventional engineering guy. We do a ton of calculus to get our degree. My first job - you just didn't need calculus (although all the associated courses in school used it to develop the theory). As a result, the one offs (less than once a year), when a problem did come up where calculus knowledge was helpful, they couldn't do the task and would go to that one guy (me) who still remembered calculus. BTW, I guarantee all the employees there got A's on their calculus courses.

hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
> You're just mirroring the parent example. Prior to AI (or even computers), this was a problem. Not at all, and your argument isn't the same thing. The problem with current AI, which is very different from past forms of automation, is that, essentially, its failure mode is undefined. Past forms of automation, for example, did not "hallucinate" seemingly correct but false answers. Even taking your own example, it was obvious to your colleagues that they didn't know how to get the answer. So they did the correct thing - they went to someone who knew how to do it. What they did not do, and which is what most current AI solutions will do, is just "wing it" with a solution that is wrong but looks correct to those without more expertise.
- williamcotton 3y ago
  “Since when is failure mode being undefined a new thing?” - C programmer
  - hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
    This is the same bad argument made in a sibling comment. Undefined behavior in C is actually strictly defined: if you want to avoid undefined behavior, don't do stuff the spec specifically says results in undefined behavior, like deference a null pointer. Writing up a set of rules to guard against undefined behavior (which is a primary job of a C developer) is simply not possible with an LLM.