4 ms·

The offered discourse on AI is “isn’t it cool how this can replace the work that you do? Eventually we won’t even need you and you can go get a hobby to spend t

The offered discourse on AI is “isn’t it cool how this can replace the work that you do? Eventually we won’t even need you and you can go get a hobby to spend the rest of your life.” That doesn’t exactly leave a lot of room for people to feel the need to be involved in a discourse about it. For one thing the majority of people aren’t all workaholics looking for extra hobby time. The author mentions ChatGpt can search the web. Okay calling a search engine and retrieving a result has been possible for a while. Llm companies just slapped statistical response on top as the UI. Maybe the discourse sucks because the reality of it sucks?

foxyv 1y ago
> "Eventually we won’t even need you and you can go get a hobby to spend the rest of your life." I think the problem is that the statement is more like: "Eventually we won't even need you and you can go die in a ditch somewhere while we party on our very large boats."
- righthand 1y ago
  Yes but the lower classes dying in a ditch is considered a hobby by the upper class.
  - foxyv 1y ago
    Ahh yeah, the alternative. AI can free you from your job so you can be hunted for sport!
- kunzhi 1y ago
  > "Eventually we won't even need you and you can go die in a ditch somewhere while we party on our very large boats." You reminded me of an interesting article from 10 years ago, so I went ahead and re-posted it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44119705 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44119705
- soraminazuki 1y ago
  If anyone wants to know exactly how that would be achieved, just look at how Google does "support" right now. No need to predict the future. Google's "support" is a robot that sends passive aggressive mocking emails to those who were screwed over by another robot that made up reasons to lock them out of their digital lives [1]. It allows Google to save a ton of money while evading accountability. It's the same thing with the latest overhyped robots. It won't even matter whether or not it's actually competent at the thing it's supposed to do. It will replace people regardless. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26061935 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26061935
- palmotea 1y ago
  > I think the problem is that the statement is more like: > "Eventually we won't even need you and you can go die in a ditch somewhere while we party on our very large boats." Exactly. If... >> “isn’t it cool how this can replace the work that you do? Eventually we won’t even need you and you can go get a hobby to spend the rest of your life.” ...was even remotely true, we'd have already had that outcome, before AI.
wenc 1y ago
How about the one some of us believe: “Isn’t it cool that I don’t have to write boiler plate and can prototype quickly? My job isn’t replaced because coding is not my job — it’s solving domain specific problems?” I’m in my late 40s, have written code for 3 decades (yes started in my teens) and have always known that the code was never the point. Code is a means of solving a problem, mostly unrelated to computers (unless you work on pure software tooling). This is why I chose not to study computer science. I studied something else and kept coding. I’ve always felt that CS as a field is oversubscribed because of $$$ dangling due to big tech. So many fields are computational these days and the key is to apply coding to these fields. For instance, a PhD in biology gets you nowhere these days so many biologists these days are computational biologists or statisticians. Same with computational chemists, etc. For most of my career I’ve written code, but in service of solving a real world physical problem (sensor based monitoring, logistics, mathematical modeling, optimization).
- righthand 1y ago
  And we must all enjoy using Llms because it helps us code? Even if you enjoy coding? What if coding helps me relax? Relaxing isn’t my job. I didn’t have to write boiler plate before Llms with a code scaffolding tool like create-express-app.
  - bananapub 1y ago
    literally no one is telling you to do anything. you can just chill out and have whatever hobbies you want, using whatever tools you want.
    - righthand 1y ago
      Just not make money at it, that’s for Llm Ceos.
      - eyesofgod 1y ago
        [flagged]
horsawlarway 1y ago
I think this is hilarious, because it's exactly the type of low effort response that tends to dominate general conversations about AI. You are making the author's point. I think there's a lot more nuance in > "isn’t it cool how this can replace the work that you do? Eventually we won’t even need you and you can go get a hobby to spend the rest of your life." than you'd like to admit, and some conversations that are worth having in earnest instead of simply resorting to trivial things like > "Maybe the discourse sucks because the reality of it sucks?" Maybe the reality of it doesn't suck? In the same way that a reality where we have things like bulldozers, printing presses, looms, and a cotton gin doesn't actually suck, at the end of the day. It absolutely sucked for some people, some of the time - and that's an important part of the conversation, but it's not the conversation "end of sentence".
- righthand 1y ago
  > than you'd like to admit, and some conversations that are worth having in earnest instead of simply resorting to trivial things like Sure the author wants to talk about technical specifics of Llms. Yet Llms enable a lot of people to avoid understanding even the technical points of it. That would disincentivize people from understanding enough to have discourse which the author considers valuable. > In the same way that a reality where we have things like bulldozers, printing presses, looms, and a cotton gin doesn't actually suck, at the end of the day. I really don’t care about the grand scheme of things type responses to criticism of Llms. But for the sake of argument why should I care about discussing Llms and their technical aspects if in the grand scheme of things we’re all to eventually die? It is the end of the sentence because most people can’t imagine what comes next besides not having a job. It’s not that they won’t be fine if a super AI takes over tomorrow, it’s that is literally the limit of their concerns today is making money for themselves. It might be different if Llms actually made the users richer but it doesn’t it makes the corporations richer.
  - horsawlarway 1y ago
    > But for the sake of argument why should I care about discussing Llms and their technical aspects if in the grand scheme of things we’re all to eventually die? Why do anything, then? This is the laziest possible retort I can imagine.
creer 1y ago
The discourse sucks not just on this topic. To be fair. It's an unsolved general problem (which deserves to put work in.)

foxyv 1y ago

> "Eventually we won’t even need you and you can go get a hobby to spend the rest of your life." I think the problem is that the statement is more like: "Eventually we won't even need you and you can go die in a ditch somewhere while we party on our very large boats."

righthand 1y ago
Yes but the lower classes dying in a ditch is considered a hobby by the upper class.
- foxyv 1y ago
  Ahh yeah, the alternative. AI can free you from your job so you can be hunted for sport!
kunzhi 1y ago
> "Eventually we won't even need you and you can go die in a ditch somewhere while we party on our very large boats." You reminded me of an interesting article from 10 years ago, so I went ahead and re-posted it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44119705 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44119705
soraminazuki 1y ago
If anyone wants to know exactly how that would be achieved, just look at how Google does "support" right now. No need to predict the future. Google's "support" is a robot that sends passive aggressive mocking emails to those who were screwed over by another robot that made up reasons to lock them out of their digital lives [1]. It allows Google to save a ton of money while evading accountability. It's the same thing with the latest overhyped robots. It won't even matter whether or not it's actually competent at the thing it's supposed to do. It will replace people regardless. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26061935 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26061935
palmotea 1y ago
> I think the problem is that the statement is more like: > "Eventually we won't even need you and you can go die in a ditch somewhere while we party on our very large boats." Exactly. If... >> “isn’t it cool how this can replace the work that you do? Eventually we won’t even need you and you can go get a hobby to spend the rest of your life.” ...was even remotely true, we'd have already had that outcome, before AI.

wenc 1y ago

How about the one some of us believe: “Isn’t it cool that I don’t have to write boiler plate and can prototype quickly? My job isn’t replaced because coding is not my job — it’s solving domain specific problems?” I’m in my late 40s, have written code for 3 decades (yes started in my teens) and have always known that the code was never the point. Code is a means of solving a problem, mostly unrelated to computers (unless you work on pure software tooling). This is why I chose not to study computer science. I studied something else and kept coding. I’ve always felt that CS as a field is oversubscribed because of $$$ dangling due to big tech. So many fields are computational these days and the key is to apply coding to these fields. For instance, a PhD in biology gets you nowhere these days so many biologists these days are computational biologists or statisticians. Same with computational chemists, etc. For most of my career I’ve written code, but in service of solving a real world physical problem (sensor based monitoring, logistics, mathematical modeling, optimization).

righthand 1y ago
And we must all enjoy using Llms because it helps us code? Even if you enjoy coding? What if coding helps me relax? Relaxing isn’t my job. I didn’t have to write boiler plate before Llms with a code scaffolding tool like create-express-app.
- bananapub 1y ago
  literally no one is telling you to do anything. you can just chill out and have whatever hobbies you want, using whatever tools you want.
  - righthand 1y ago
    Just not make money at it, that’s for Llm Ceos.
    - eyesofgod 1y ago
      [flagged]

horsawlarway 1y ago

I think this is hilarious, because it's exactly the type of low effort response that tends to dominate general conversations about AI. You are making the author's point. I think there's a lot more nuance in > "isn’t it cool how this can replace the work that you do? Eventually we won’t even need you and you can go get a hobby to spend the rest of your life." than you'd like to admit, and some conversations that are worth having in earnest instead of simply resorting to trivial things like > "Maybe the discourse sucks because the reality of it sucks?" Maybe the reality of it doesn't suck? In the same way that a reality where we have things like bulldozers, printing presses, looms, and a cotton gin doesn't actually suck, at the end of the day. It absolutely sucked for some people, some of the time - and that's an important part of the conversation, but it's not the conversation "end of sentence".

righthand 1y ago
> than you'd like to admit, and some conversations that are worth having in earnest instead of simply resorting to trivial things like Sure the author wants to talk about technical specifics of Llms. Yet Llms enable a lot of people to avoid understanding even the technical points of it. That would disincentivize people from understanding enough to have discourse which the author considers valuable. > In the same way that a reality where we have things like bulldozers, printing presses, looms, and a cotton gin doesn't actually suck, at the end of the day. I really don’t care about the grand scheme of things type responses to criticism of Llms. But for the sake of argument why should I care about discussing Llms and their technical aspects if in the grand scheme of things we’re all to eventually die? It is the end of the sentence because most people can’t imagine what comes next besides not having a job. It’s not that they won’t be fine if a super AI takes over tomorrow, it’s that is literally the limit of their concerns today is making money for themselves. It might be different if Llms actually made the users richer but it doesn’t it makes the corporations richer.
- horsawlarway 1y ago
  > But for the sake of argument why should I care about discussing Llms and their technical aspects if in the grand scheme of things we’re all to eventually die? Why do anything, then? This is the laziest possible retort I can imagine.

creer 1y ago

The discourse sucks not just on this topic. To be fair. It's an unsolved general problem (which deserves to put work in.)