4 ms·

From what I've seen, LLMs just accelerate or compound this whole process as well. Everyone has the same group think, it bleeds into the way the LLM generates c

From what I've seen, LLMs just accelerate or compound this whole process as well. Everyone has the same group think, it bleeds into the way the LLM generates code and ultimately it just rots teams.

inigyou 3mo ago
Corporations were the original AIs. They were slower, a bit less predictable, but they were superhuman intelligence disciplined to produce only the most bland depersonalised slop at all times.
- AnimalMuppet 3mo ago
  And, in fact, corporations are why AIs produce what they do - because they were trained on the output of corporations.
  - hunterpayne 3mo ago
    They were trained on the output of Reddit mostly. Its a miracle they even work at all given that.
- edot 3mo ago
  Interesting take. I assume that, because corporations are a subset of “groups of people” that this applies to any group? The theory here being that, in the same way that LLMs produce the average of everything they’ve trained on, a group of people produces the average of every individual’s ideas and efforts (subject to things like some people having more power than others, etc.)? I don’t think this is always true, however. It’s provably false, actually, because I can name at least one group of people that has done something unique and not sloppy. For example, the C8 Corvette is pretty sweet. So is Costco’s supply chain and employment practices. And I also think Pink Floyd’s music is pretty non-average.
  - jurgenburgen 3mo ago
    If every member of a group is above average then the output would also be above average?
zer00eyz 3mo ago
I do consulting, I see lots of teams using LLM's to "speed run to a legacy code base". Much of what goes on in corporate America is not blindness its accretion. They simply dont have the culture to evolve. The devotion to next quarters numbers and share holder value play a massive part in this.
- chickensong 3mo ago
  > They simply dont have the culture to evolve. The devotion to next quarters numbers and share holder value play a massive part in this. I think this sums up the problems pointed out by the article, as well as most organizational problems in general. When I was younger, I thought management was basically useless, do-nothing mucky mucks, who did more harm than good. This can still be true, but I've changed my opinion. Hiring and firing is hard. Creating a strong and healthy culture is hard. Defining success, and steering the ship to it is hard. I think as long as money is the measurement of success, particularly from a short-term viewpoint, nothing can change. Public companies basically cannot evolve their form, because boards and shareholders will rarely agree to leave money on the table for an opaque long view that prioritizes culture over profit.
  - zer00eyz 3mo ago
    > Hiring and firing is hard. Creating a strong and healthy culture is hard. Defining success, and steering the ship to it is hard. A big subset of these issues are American business culture. > Public companies basically cannot evolve their form, because boards and shareholders will rarely agree to leave money on the table for an opaque long view that prioritizes culture over profit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co. makes a lot of this possible. Other corporate structures are possible: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation

From what I've seen, LLMs just accelerate or compound this whole process as well. Everyone has the same group think, it bleeds into the way the LLM generates code and ultimately it just rots teams.

inigyou 3mo ago

Corporations were the original AIs. They were slower, a bit less predictable, but they were superhuman intelligence disciplined to produce only the most bland depersonalised slop at all times.

AnimalMuppet 3mo ago
And, in fact, corporations are why AIs produce what they do - because they were trained on the output of corporations.
- hunterpayne 3mo ago
  They were trained on the output of Reddit mostly. Its a miracle they even work at all given that.
edot 3mo ago
Interesting take. I assume that, because corporations are a subset of “groups of people” that this applies to any group? The theory here being that, in the same way that LLMs produce the average of everything they’ve trained on, a group of people produces the average of every individual’s ideas and efforts (subject to things like some people having more power than others, etc.)? I don’t think this is always true, however. It’s provably false, actually, because I can name at least one group of people that has done something unique and not sloppy. For example, the C8 Corvette is pretty sweet. So is Costco’s supply chain and employment practices. And I also think Pink Floyd’s music is pretty non-average.
- jurgenburgen 3mo ago
  If every member of a group is above average then the output would also be above average?

zer00eyz 3mo ago

I do consulting, I see lots of teams using LLM's to "speed run to a legacy code base". Much of what goes on in corporate America is not blindness its accretion. They simply dont have the culture to evolve. The devotion to next quarters numbers and share holder value play a massive part in this.

chickensong 3mo ago
> They simply dont have the culture to evolve. The devotion to next quarters numbers and share holder value play a massive part in this. I think this sums up the problems pointed out by the article, as well as most organizational problems in general. When I was younger, I thought management was basically useless, do-nothing mucky mucks, who did more harm than good. This can still be true, but I've changed my opinion. Hiring and firing is hard. Creating a strong and healthy culture is hard. Defining success, and steering the ship to it is hard. I think as long as money is the measurement of success, particularly from a short-term viewpoint, nothing can change. Public companies basically cannot evolve their form, because boards and shareholders will rarely agree to leave money on the table for an opaque long view that prioritizes culture over profit.
- zer00eyz 3mo ago
  > Hiring and firing is hard. Creating a strong and healthy culture is hard. Defining success, and steering the ship to it is hard. A big subset of these issues are American business culture. > Public companies basically cannot evolve their form, because boards and shareholders will rarely agree to leave money on the table for an opaque long view that prioritizes culture over profit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co. makes a lot of this possible. Other corporate structures are possible: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation