4 ms·
What’s the argument here that he’s not considering all the information regarding GenAI? That there’s a trend to his opinion? If I consider all the evidence re
by 2muchcoffeeman 1y ago
What’s the argument here that he’s not considering all the information regarding GenAI?
That there’s a trend to his opinion?
If I consider all the evidence regarding gravity, all my papers will be “gravity is real”.
In what ways is he only choosing what he wants to hear?
- senko 1y agoReplied elsewhere in the thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44279283 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44279283 To your example about gravity, I argue that he goes from "gravity is real" to "therefore we can't fly", and "yeah maybe some people can but that's not really solving gravity and they need to go down eventually!"
- 2muchcoffeeman 1y agoIf your argument about my gravity example holds. That’s not really a good argument. Between Newtons death and the first powered flight was almost 200 years. Being all negative about gravity would be reasonable since a bunch of stuff had to happen. I’m not sure I buy your longer argument either. I have a feeling the nay sayers are right on this. The next leap in AI isn’t something we’re going to recognise. (Obviously it’s possible - humans exist)