encyclopedism

6 ms·

31.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
> Why must this result in less joy. The parent's point is better articulated as: programming COUPLED with being paid do it is what is now less enjoyable due to AI. You are free to enjoy pretty much anything but you may not necessari
32.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
Anecdotally at least I've seen devs who have checked out by completely flipping careers or doing something zany such as living off grid. Unfortunately like most things your options are limited to your economic circumstances.
33.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
I'm not saying it's economics in a vacuum. I'm suggesting that it is LARGELY economics. > There'd be middling salaries for developers across the country, and probably actually the bulk of the work would actually happe
34.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
It is not always the case that there is a way to adapt to a certain thing. How can the immense investment in AI pay off? AI is doing away with human intellectual input. There are 25 million developers globally, AI efficiency may mean in the
35.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
For many people coding isn't just a means to an end but a pleasure in itself. Coding by hand, the raw intellectual challenge to my mind has been one of the greatest 'jobs' you could have. Earning money for what is essentially
36.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
I would guess that most HN users are employees. By far the largest dictator of your day to day life is your employer. Sentences such as this one from the article "Hopefully, many developers will slowly rediscover their love for program
37.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
Precisely my point. Say for examples planes, trains or automobiles, humans may make way more errors than a computer does but you can bet your bottom dollar the threshold for allowing computers to autonomously control the above is way higher
38.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
Because Claude isn't a human the perception of it is different. Humans can fly planes, computers too can fly planes. I'm not going to give the same leeway to a 'computer' flying a plane that I would to a human. Because w
39.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
LLM's are the primary cause of SO decline. Largely due to LLM's having scraped SO (and everything else available on the WWW). It's the reason there is a decline in traffic across the web i.e. Wikipedia. LLM's surface th
40.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
Exactly this! LLM's are replacing your 'brain' i.e. the deepest most amazing part of you. The potential value of this to business is astronomical! No there won't be an explosion of new software, a minor blip perhaps and
41.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
I think you missed my point I'm not denying the code does not produce a function of effect. The code however is uninteresting because almost anyone can also generate it. I'm interested in the source code to Quake but not in the so
42.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
Attempting to illustrate why your analogy is flawed and explain myself a little better I would add that there are quantitive things and qualitative things. If the object was to remove some volume of earth (quantitive) then whether it is mov
43.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
> Who says you need a boss or other human coworkers? I didn't. However most people on here and around the world are employed I am merely pointing out that your employer dictates so much of what you do. > Start your own consultanc
44.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
That's such a naive take, the joy of helping the customer ha! That's a situation your employer sets up for you! Try reading your sentence above and swapping in 'EMPLOYEE': 'These LLMs are like EMPLOYEES. The custom
45.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
If it's code built by an LLM it's almost inherently uninteresting in that 'anyone' can also generate the same slop. Beyond the initial novelty the 'achievement' really doesn't stretch that far. Your slop,
46.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
What is 'reasoning' or IQ or more importantly consciousness are very difficult open questions in science. An approach that might shed some light is instead to define what consciousness ISN'T or what thinking ISN'T. Naive
47.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
Written by AI and not nearly as impressive at all. Such a shame because I thought someone had spent real time and effort producing this. The output is commoditised and now neither important nor precious. Damn near anyone could repeat it.
48.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
You are correct, it was flagged almost immediately and I'm unsure why (though my conspiratorial brain kicked in attempting to turn up answers). In any case and perhaps as a consequence I feel it hasn't gotten the traction it shoul
49.
Coding without AI: a revolutionary new way to work(isaaclyman.com)
4 points by encyclopedism 3mo ago|0 comments
50.
by encyclopedism 3mo ago
Defining consciousness is one of the most difficult outstanding problems in the whole of science please see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness An approach that might shed some light is instead
51.
by encyclopedism 8mo ago
LLM's don't 'think' nor do they 'reason'.
52.
Fine, I'll Try AI(technobabble.bearblog.dev)
2 points by encyclopedism 8mo ago|0 comments
53.
by encyclopedism 8mo ago
If I can 'speak' for the OP: > I keep trying to ride a bike but I keep falling off I do not think this analogy is apt. The core issue is that AI is taking away, or will take away, or threatens to take away, experiences and acti
54.
by encyclopedism 8mo ago
I find it interesting, the comments on this post (not just this particular comment per se) and the sheer inability to relate or ATTEMPT to relate to another persons experience or feeling. The post itself articulated a viewpoint and experien
55.
LLMs sabotage existing programming practices by privatizing a public good(michiel.buddingh.eu)
3 points by encyclopedism 8mo ago|0 comments
56.
by encyclopedism 9mo ago
We know what an LLM is in fact you can build one from scratch if you like. e.g. https://www.manning.com/books/build-a-large-language-model-f... It's an algorithm and a completely mechanical process which you can q
57.
by encyclopedism 9mo ago
> But you could make the exact same argument for a human mind? It would be an argument and you are free to make it. What the human mind is, is an open scientific and philosophical problem many are working on. The point is that LLM's
58.
by encyclopedism 9mo ago
Fundamentally these shortcomings cannot be addressed. They can and are improved (papered over) over time. For example by improving and tweaking the training data. Adding in new data sets is the usual fix. A prime example 'count the num
59.
by encyclopedism 9mo ago
I don't understand why this point is NOT getting across to so many on HN. LLM's do not think, understand, reason, reflect, comprehend and they never shall. I have commented elsewhere but this bears repeating If you had enough pape
60.
by encyclopedism 9mo ago
I fully agree with your sentiments. People really need to study a little!

More ›