3 ms·

If hammer companies were suddenly the most valuable international companies, and spent millions on ad campaigns and lobbying about trusting the hammer interface

by mvid 5mo ago

If hammer companies were suddenly the most valuable international companies, and spent millions on ad campaigns and lobbying about trusting the hammer interface, then you can assume a large amount of people might trust the hammer interface

walletdrainer 5mo ago
Where are the ad campaigns telling me to trust LLMs? I don’t use an adblocker, do read traditional dead tree newspapers and do get exposed to satellite tv channels. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone anywhere telling me how reliable LLMs are. Pretty sure this tech sells itself to consumers, enterprise sales are what they’ve always been.
- card_zero 5mo ago
  So now you're pivoting away from the caretaker proposal? I thought it had potential but I don't know how you'd fund it.
  - walletdrainer 5mo ago
    > I thought it had potential but I don't know how you'd fund it. The same way we fund other social services here in Europe. If an individual is incapable of caring for themselves, the state is expected to care for them.
- alnwlsn 5mo ago
  Literally saw a video ad the other day which went like "I've always been cautious using Google's AI because it sometimes gets things wrong, but this time, it got it right!"
leidenfrost 5mo ago
Still, it's a tool. Even if your tool learns to talk and to make decisions, it's still a tool, not a person. You're the person and the one responsible for the decisions you make based on your tools. Going back from the analogy, the problem is that we conflated software <engineers> with "coders". A lot of people thought their job was to create code, we gave them a tool to generate a lot of code fast, and they truly think that "more code" = "more good"
- kiba 5mo ago
  A hammer usually doesn't have the power to persuade people.
- TheScaryOne 5mo ago
  > it's still a tool, not a person. Tell that to the CEO's who have replaced all of their yes-men with yes-chatbots.

by mvid 5mo ago

walletdrainer 5mo ago

Where are the ad campaigns telling me to trust LLMs? I don’t use an adblocker, do read traditional dead tree newspapers and do get exposed to satellite tv channels. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone anywhere telling me how reliable LLMs are. Pretty sure this tech sells itself to consumers, enterprise sales are what they’ve always been.

card_zero 5mo ago
So now you're pivoting away from the caretaker proposal? I thought it had potential but I don't know how you'd fund it.
- walletdrainer 5mo ago
  > I thought it had potential but I don't know how you'd fund it. The same way we fund other social services here in Europe. If an individual is incapable of caring for themselves, the state is expected to care for them.
alnwlsn 5mo ago
Literally saw a video ad the other day which went like "I've always been cautious using Google's AI because it sometimes gets things wrong, but this time, it got it right!"

leidenfrost 5mo ago

Still, it's a tool. Even if your tool learns to talk and to make decisions, it's still a tool, not a person. You're the person and the one responsible for the decisions you make based on your tools. Going back from the analogy, the problem is that we conflated software <engineers> with "coders". A lot of people thought their job was to create code, we gave them a tool to generate a lot of code fast, and they truly think that "more code" = "more good"

kiba 5mo ago
A hammer usually doesn't have the power to persuade people.
TheScaryOne 5mo ago
> it's still a tool, not a person. Tell that to the CEO's who have replaced all of their yes-men with yes-chatbots.