3 ms·

>Otherwise it's value destroying given the huge costs associated with producing what are essentially very good chat bots. It's astonishing that anyone even tec

>Otherwise it's value destroying given the huge costs associated with producing what are essentially very good chat bots. It's astonishing that anyone even tech-adjacent can say something like this. I'd argue these tools are already beyond "very good chat bots". And you think this is it? This is as far as we'll get with them, or AI? That's impossible to believe looking at history. Besides the fact that laying miles and miles of "excess" fibre was once seen as a bubble...

alangibson 2y ago
> It's astonishing that anyone even tech-adjacent can say something like this. Then I'll present my credentials. 25 years in tech and I use ChatGPT every day. It's an incredibly good chat bot and code snippet generator. The more I use it the more I see how much of a stochastic parrot it is. It's usually not that hard to find the code it based it's response on on GitHub and Stack overflow if you've got time to kill.
- itsoktocry 2y ago
  >Then I'll present my credentials. 25 years in tech and I use ChatGPT every day. I think you're proving my point: long-time tech person who'd rather look stuff up on Stack Overflow, but yet uses the tool every day.
  - alangibson 2y ago
    What? I use ChatGPT so I dont have to look it up. And that's the point I've been making in this thread: GenAI is an incredible summarizer. But that's not nearly good enough to justify the investment and multiples were seeing now. Only AGI can justify the money being laid out right now. Without AGI companies like OpenAI have negative value because they will always loose money.
- awwaiid 2y ago
  If you've got time to kill -- that says to me that it is faster, and therefore better. Time is money. How much time are we talking? If this is a 10x speed up on your research cycle then that sounds like a subtle revolution.
IshKebab 2y ago
Just ignore him. It's just like the people who refused to get a smart phone years after everyone had them. Some combination of being threatened by AI, not wanting to have to learn a new thing, and wanting to seem cool and "in the know" by rejecting the popular opinion. Anyone that has actually used ChatGPT etc al can trivially see its value.
nmcfarl 2y ago
I don’t know – I look at history and I see series of AI bubbles directly after a breakthrough that led to a great advancement in the science and nothing else. And then AI crashes and winters. I think it’s completely possible to look around and think that this is as good as ChatGPT is going to get, or maybe it’ll get to 5.5 in a few years and peter out there (instead of here). And then we’ll spend the next decade shrinking and cramming and maybe we’ll even get 5.5 intelligence on our watches, but it’s never getting smarter than that. Then in 2040 we’ll have another breakthrough, another hype cycle, and things will get smarter again, for another few years. Looking at history, that’s a future I can believe in. —- PS. Generally I think these large transformer models are amazing, show great utility, and I use them every day.

alangibson 2y ago

> It's astonishing that anyone even tech-adjacent can say something like this. Then I'll present my credentials. 25 years in tech and I use ChatGPT every day. It's an incredibly good chat bot and code snippet generator. The more I use it the more I see how much of a stochastic parrot it is. It's usually not that hard to find the code it based it's response on on GitHub and Stack overflow if you've got time to kill.

itsoktocry 2y ago
>Then I'll present my credentials. 25 years in tech and I use ChatGPT every day. I think you're proving my point: long-time tech person who'd rather look stuff up on Stack Overflow, but yet uses the tool every day.
- alangibson 2y ago
  What? I use ChatGPT so I dont have to look it up. And that's the point I've been making in this thread: GenAI is an incredible summarizer. But that's not nearly good enough to justify the investment and multiples were seeing now. Only AGI can justify the money being laid out right now. Without AGI companies like OpenAI have negative value because they will always loose money.
awwaiid 2y ago
If you've got time to kill -- that says to me that it is faster, and therefore better. Time is money. How much time are we talking? If this is a 10x speed up on your research cycle then that sounds like a subtle revolution.

IshKebab 2y ago

Just ignore him. It's just like the people who refused to get a smart phone years after everyone had them. Some combination of being threatened by AI, not wanting to have to learn a new thing, and wanting to seem cool and "in the know" by rejecting the popular opinion. Anyone that has actually used ChatGPT etc al can trivially see its value.

nmcfarl 2y ago

I don’t know – I look at history and I see series of AI bubbles directly after a breakthrough that led to a great advancement in the science and nothing else. And then AI crashes and winters. I think it’s completely possible to look around and think that this is as good as ChatGPT is going to get, or maybe it’ll get to 5.5 in a few years and peter out there (instead of here). And then we’ll spend the next decade shrinking and cramming and maybe we’ll even get 5.5 intelligence on our watches, but it’s never getting smarter than that. Then in 2040 we’ll have another breakthrough, another hype cycle, and things will get smarter again, for another few years. Looking at history, that’s a future I can believe in. —- PS. Generally I think these large transformer models are amazing, show great utility, and I use them every day.