2 ms·

I don't think any of those statements are controversial. Do you mind elaborating?

by Kiro 11mo ago

rckt 11mo ago
There's nothing to elaborate actually. The state of the AI currently does not allow to use seriously. If we mean "then spend N amount of time reviewing and trying to make a better output", then yes, I can agree that AI is usable. But the time wasted on the reviews can be simply put into doing the task yourself. And it will be faster and less frustrating.
- Kiro 11mo ago
  You not being able to use it successfully is no basis for such a conclusion. One verified observation is stronger than infinite lack of observation.
  - rckt 11mo ago
    It's not my personal observation. It's a general observation. I witnessed only one person in real life who said that they use AI in their job and they are completely satisfied with it. The rest point out the poor quality of the output and how technically savvy one should be to successfully (to some extent) use the AI in their jobs.
    - Kiro 11mo ago
      Pretty long stretch between "useless" and "completely satisfied". I don't think I'm completely satisfied with anything in my life including AI, but that doesn't mean I'm not having a lot of success with it. The things stated in the article are true and even pretty tame. Agent mode in Cursor has been standard for months and I'm surprised that anyone would say that LLMs are not good at scanning documents. The normal AI skeptic's position would be "yes, but that's all they're good at".
      - rckt 11mo ago
        My personal experience with any approach I tried ended up in a semi-failure state. I can't trust LLM and have to check everything myself to either actually solve a problem or be sure that the LLM did not invent things. This fact simply kills the usefulness of LLMs. They are not reliable and I waste more time trying to accomplish something just using the AI. If people around me were praising AI and I was the only one unable to find an approach, I would agree with your points. But it's not the case. The general perception of the AI tools is quite pessimistic.

I don't think any of those statements are controversial. Do you mind elaborating?

by Kiro 11mo ago

I don't think any of those statements are controversial. Do you mind elaborating?

rckt 11mo ago

There's nothing to elaborate actually. The state of the AI currently does not allow to use seriously. If we mean "then spend N amount of time reviewing and trying to make a better output", then yes, I can agree that AI is usable. But the time wasted on the reviews can be simply put into doing the task yourself. And it will be faster and less frustrating.

Kiro 11mo ago
You not being able to use it successfully is no basis for such a conclusion. One verified observation is stronger than infinite lack of observation.
- rckt 11mo ago
  It's not my personal observation. It's a general observation. I witnessed only one person in real life who said that they use AI in their job and they are completely satisfied with it. The rest point out the poor quality of the output and how technically savvy one should be to successfully (to some extent) use the AI in their jobs.
  - Kiro 11mo ago
    Pretty long stretch between "useless" and "completely satisfied". I don't think I'm completely satisfied with anything in my life including AI, but that doesn't mean I'm not having a lot of success with it. The things stated in the article are true and even pretty tame. Agent mode in Cursor has been standard for months and I'm surprised that anyone would say that LLMs are not good at scanning documents. The normal AI skeptic's position would be "yes, but that's all they're good at".
    - rckt 11mo ago
      My personal experience with any approach I tried ended up in a semi-failure state. I can't trust LLM and have to check everything myself to either actually solve a problem or be sure that the LLM did not invent things. This fact simply kills the usefulness of LLMs. They are not reliable and I waste more time trying to accomplish something just using the AI. If people around me were praising AI and I was the only one unable to find an approach, I would agree with your points. But it's not the case. The general perception of the AI tools is quite pessimistic.