anthonyrstevens

4 ms·

1.
by anthonyrstevens 10d ago
>> There are many claims that current LLMs surpass humans in cognitive abilities Where? By whom? This is certainly not (yet) the general consensus, as I understand it. Are you taking the most optimistic / untethered comments as t
2.
by anthonyrstevens 10d ago
>> the breathless rhetoric about "AGI" coming from the providers' general direction So many commenters here see it as their ... duty? to argue against the most optimistic/unhinged (take your pick) arguments from &q
3.
by anthonyrstevens 11d ago
This is a good comment and I'd like to add that I sometimes am astonished how many comments on HN are on the topic of liability or blame for this or that. I see liability as a 2nd or even 3rd order phenomenon of most of the subjects un
4.
by anthonyrstevens 11d ago
I don't find this to be the case at all.
5.
by anthonyrstevens 12d ago
>> AI is dropping out of the spotlight spit take
6.
by anthonyrstevens 12d ago
How you get that from the OP leaves me scratching my head. What they said: >> I can't help be hopeful that AI's sheer potential might come to invert that curve. At the very least we could really use a revolutionary technolog
7.
by anthonyrstevens 12d ago
>> I have a feeling Is this the anti-AI crowd's last line of defense?
8.
by anthonyrstevens 12d ago
I think the point is that rather than YOU finding out the answers to those questions, and post only if the answers were indicative of some "gotcha", someone ALWAYS posts something similar to your OP as a lazy/low-effort way t
9.
by anthonyrstevens 12d ago
I'm waiting for the inevitable: "Well, LLMs only cured a few types of cancer"
10.
by anthonyrstevens 12d ago
"If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants" - Issac Newton, in a 1675 letter to Robert Hooke
11.
by anthonyrstevens 15d ago
Oh goodness. This is on HN?
12.
by anthonyrstevens 15d ago
Magic 8-Ball says: SIGNS POINT TO YES
13.
by anthonyrstevens 15d ago
If the AI haters would avoid AI articles and stop adding useless, unrelated "slop!" and "just text prediction!" comments, HN would be a much better place IMHO.
14.
by anthonyrstevens 15d ago
How many "AnslopicNNN" accounts do you have?
15.
by anthonyrstevens 15d ago
>> How about some less skimming of the text before you jump the contrarian gun? Evergreen comment TBH
16.
by anthonyrstevens 16d ago
This is such an uncharitable (and, in my opinion, incorrect) take
17.
by anthonyrstevens 16d ago
>> They generate text Can we retire this incorrect meme please
18.
by anthonyrstevens 16d ago
>> all of the experts refuse to share their data What? So much research is being generated around this topic. Perhaps you are just unfamiliar with it.
19.
by anthonyrstevens 16d ago
Technically correct is the best kind of correct?
20.
by anthonyrstevens 16d ago
Microsoft certainly did throw Apple a $150MM lifeline that was sorely needed, else they were looking at bankruptcy within weeks. I would say that "saved" them. AND yes, both companies benefited.
21.
by anthonyrstevens 17d ago
I'm going to say 2050 in the United States; 2040 in some conflict zone.
22.
by anthonyrstevens 17d ago
I saw the GP as a snarky riposte against the doomerism of the anti-AI crowd. Technology has been augmenting or replacing human work for as long as the first slab of rock was shoved up an inclined plane (wedge) and popped into its spot in th
23.
by anthonyrstevens 17d ago
This is needlessly combative and insulting.
24.
by anthonyrstevens 18d ago
This does not strike me as true at all. Nobody's crowing about the verbosity of their AI-generated code. Rather, it seems to me they're impressed by the functionality or capabilities relative to time/cost.
25.
by anthonyrstevens 18d ago
Because sequential comparison is part of the point of doing them?
26.
by anthonyrstevens 18d ago
I think you're confusing a recurrence relationship with recursive execution. Until AI has control over its inputs (including physical inputs - compute hardware, etc.) it's not quite RSI. We'll get there. They'll get ther
27.
by anthonyrstevens 18d ago
Magic 8-Ball says: VERY DOUBTFUL
28.
by anthonyrstevens 22d ago
Is the Turing test focused, perhaps unnecessarily, on deciding how well a computer "thinks like a human"? Should we expand our universe of possibilities to admit that there might be AI that is generally intelligent, but which has
29.
by anthonyrstevens 22d ago
I don't think this is true.
30.
by anthonyrstevens 22d ago
Frontier models can do this.

More ›