3 ms·

I've noticed something about people's reaction to AI. People who view themselves mainly as engineers or craftsmen are threatened by AI, understandably. People w

I've noticed something about people's reaction to AI. People who view themselves mainly as engineers or craftsmen are threatened by AI, understandably. People who just want to make cool stuff, solve real problems or just have fun are not threatened, but love it. And I get it, an expert furniture craftsman will not have respect for IKEA furniture, and that's fine. But it means I can affordably furnish a new apartment for $2k instead of $20k. Of course it's even more threatening because there is the risk that the AI will actually do a better job in the future. But people still play Chess and have fun with that, and people enjoy watching Magnus Carlsen play even though he can't beat the AI on a phone. In the end, we will all have to adapt, and for your own sake I don't think it helps putting your head in the sand and being bitter. Instead of being bitter, try thinking about all the cool stuff you can make now as a one person team.

9rx 1y ago
The trouble right now, in the context of engineering, is that it is terribly difficult to get AI to produce something you can be confident in. We've been burned by the human junior engineer who produces something that gets things done in the present, but two-three years down the line becomes a nightmare liability, and AI is now that same junior engineer. It is too early to tell if what AI produces will also become that terrible nightmare in a few years, or if AI will also become the saviour to make what would have been a nightmare a delight. So, one has to be in defence mode in case the nightmare reality is the one that comes to fruition, which limits how far it can be taken. Unless you just want to produce cool stuff that you plan to throw away tomorrow. That is perfectly valid! But not usually what engineers get to work on. Time will give more clarity.
- skydhash 1y ago
  How much time do we need? Industrial invention used to be judged by actual usefulness. If we take space exploration as an example, at every stage, we have actual usefulness for what the technology so far was able to accomplish. Same with computing. But now we're two years after the first release to the general public of LLMs and no one can provide an actual, reliable use case for it. Instead, it's mostly about destroying values, hindering workflows, and crippling the internet.
  - 9rx 1y ago
    > How much time do we need? A few years will start to show if what AI is producing is a lability, or if it is just fine, methinks. If you haven't felt any pains from its legacy cruft by that point, it isn't apt to magically appear a long way down the line. > If we take space exploration as an example, at every stage, we have actual usefulness for what the technology so far was able to accomplish. When Archytas propelled a wooden bird with steam, the first recognized step towards building the rockets that got us to space, what usefulness was found in that? It offered a basic foundation on which we were able to consider other solutions and the concept in general. But couldn't you say that is, at very least, where we are at with LLMs right now too?
    - skydhash 1y ago
      Let's ignore the hype and marketing and truly consider LLM as the first stage of "something". The truth is that I've heard a lot of speculation, but no inching towards any of the speculated objective on a practical scale. For anything else, any such first stage was usually constrained on a very small scale while the glaring issues were ironed out. Now a lot of us are being forced to tolerate what is essentially a prototype or toy in tools and systems that were fine before.
      - 9rx 1y ago
        Perhaps LLMs are in the Model T stage? The experience is terrible. Its slow. The roads are muddy and full of ruts. You are bound to break your arm when you spin the crank. But, still, it offers something ever so slightly more than the horse that you put up with it anyway.
        skydhash 1y ago
        More like a Model T that goes fast in the wrong direction, don't respond to the steering wheel, decide to reverse on random occasions,... The road may be bad and the horse is not that great, but no one would hop on that particular model unless for entertainment purposes.

9rx 1y ago

The trouble right now, in the context of engineering, is that it is terribly difficult to get AI to produce something you can be confident in. We've been burned by the human junior engineer who produces something that gets things done in the present, but two-three years down the line becomes a nightmare liability, and AI is now that same junior engineer. It is too early to tell if what AI produces will also become that terrible nightmare in a few years, or if AI will also become the saviour to make what would have been a nightmare a delight. So, one has to be in defence mode in case the nightmare reality is the one that comes to fruition, which limits how far it can be taken. Unless you just want to produce cool stuff that you plan to throw away tomorrow. That is perfectly valid! But not usually what engineers get to work on. Time will give more clarity.

skydhash 1y ago
How much time do we need? Industrial invention used to be judged by actual usefulness. If we take space exploration as an example, at every stage, we have actual usefulness for what the technology so far was able to accomplish. Same with computing. But now we're two years after the first release to the general public of LLMs and no one can provide an actual, reliable use case for it. Instead, it's mostly about destroying values, hindering workflows, and crippling the internet.
- 9rx 1y ago
  > How much time do we need? A few years will start to show if what AI is producing is a lability, or if it is just fine, methinks. If you haven't felt any pains from its legacy cruft by that point, it isn't apt to magically appear a long way down the line. > If we take space exploration as an example, at every stage, we have actual usefulness for what the technology so far was able to accomplish. When Archytas propelled a wooden bird with steam, the first recognized step towards building the rockets that got us to space, what usefulness was found in that? It offered a basic foundation on which we were able to consider other solutions and the concept in general. But couldn't you say that is, at very least, where we are at with LLMs right now too?
  - skydhash 1y ago
    Let's ignore the hype and marketing and truly consider LLM as the first stage of "something". The truth is that I've heard a lot of speculation, but no inching towards any of the speculated objective on a practical scale. For anything else, any such first stage was usually constrained on a very small scale while the glaring issues were ironed out. Now a lot of us are being forced to tolerate what is essentially a prototype or toy in tools and systems that were fine before.
    - 9rx 1y ago
      Perhaps LLMs are in the Model T stage? The experience is terrible. Its slow. The roads are muddy and full of ruts. You are bound to break your arm when you spin the crank. But, still, it offers something ever so slightly more than the horse that you put up with it anyway.
      - skydhash 1y ago
        More like a Model T that goes fast in the wrong direction, don't respond to the steering wheel, decide to reverse on random occasions,... The road may be bad and the horse is not that great, but no one would hop on that particular model unless for entertainment purposes.