4 ms·
> When we only half-understand something, we close the loop from observation to belief by relying on the judgement of our peers and authority figures, but these
by benterix 1y ago
> When we only half-understand something, we close the loop from observation to belief by relying on the judgement of our peers and authority figures, but these groups in tech are currently almost certain to be wrong or substantially biased about generative models.
Yeah but the same could be said basically about any hype, like XML 25 ago or object-oriented programming. There is huge hype and then at some point the dust settles down and the society and businesses use the bits that are actually useful.
- mwcampbell 1y agoSo why not wait and find out what those useful and not-so-harmful bits actually are, if there are any?
- verdverm 1y agoHow can you know without trying to use them...?
- JohnFen 1y agoHistory has plenty of examples of extremely hyped things that ultimately turned out to be worthless or of negative value, too.
- verdverm 1y agoAI will not be one of them, it's been useful since before LLMs and has only become moreso since. They will continue to improve in capabilities and decrease in resources required.
- JohnFen 1y agoMaybe, maybe not. It's far too soon to tell with LLMs. We'll have to check back in a decade or so. (Just a note -- a thing can be useful and still be a net negative.)
- benterix 1y agoYour argument is too broad. You could say that we know today that social media are net negative (because of impact on mental health and many other reasons). Yet, how are you going to measure that? Same could be said about any technology, there will always be some negative aspects.