keeda

25 ms·

451.
by keeda 7mo ago
I'm pretty sure a large fraction of the vibecoded stuff out there is from the "ideas guys." This time will be different because they'll find out very quickly whether their ideas are worth anything. The term "slo
452.
by keeda 7mo ago
I see, thanks for the explanation!
453.
by keeda 7mo ago
That may be, and we can debate the level of novelty, but it is novel, because this exact proof didn't exist before, something which many claim was not possible with AI. In fact, just a few years ago, based on some dabbling in NLP a d
454.
by keeda 7mo ago
> LLMs will NEVER be able to do that, because it doesn't exist. I mean, TFA literally claims that an AI has solved an open Frontier Math problem, descibed as "A collection of unsolved mathematics problems that have resisted s
455.
by keeda 7mo ago
I'm curious as to why you consider this as the benchmark for AI capabilities. Extremely few humans can solve hard problems or do much innovation. The vast majority of knowledge work requires neither of these, and AI has been excelling
456.
by keeda 7mo ago
It doesn't have to be the most really, but it's fair that they get some monetary returns commensurate with the value provided. All human society is based on an exchange of value, after all. But realistically speaking, billions o
457.
by keeda 7mo ago
> you know, it's more difficult to read other people's/machine code than to write it yourself Not at all, it's just a skill that gets easier with practice. Generally if you're in the position to review a lot of
458.
by keeda 7mo ago
> Lines of code are meaningful when taken in aggregate and useless as a metric for an individual’s contributions. Yes, and in fact a lot of the studies that show the impact of AI on coding productivity get dismissed because they use Lo
459.
by keeda 7mo ago
Yes unfortunately, the forces of enshittification will be at play with any model provider that has had billions invested in it. > If they want to capture some of the value they provide, they should do it the standard fashion where they
460.
by keeda 7mo ago
On a related note, I think that's a good monetization vector for chatbots. Long back I asked ChatGPT to recommend a few USB hard drives with very specific requirements -- including a small size and weight ("can be duct-taped to a
461.
by keeda 7mo ago
Wait, is novelty really the benchmark here? 1. The experiment was to show that AI can generate working code for a fairly complicated spec. Was it even asked to do things in a novel way? If not, why would we expect it do anything other than
462.
by keeda 7mo ago
That's fair, but I suspect the underlying mechanism is the same -- the models prefer re-writing code from scratch rather than looking around for reusable abtsractions, which may exist just a few modules over, or -- for smaller models -
463.
by keeda 7mo ago
There are actually quite a few studies out there that look at LLM code quality (e.g. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=LLM+... ) and they mostly have similar findings. This reinforces the idea t
464.
by keeda 7mo ago
I dunno, I have extensive experience reviewing code, and I still review all the AI generated code I own, and I find nothing to complain about in the vast majority of cases. I think it is based on "holding it right." For instance
465.
by keeda 7mo ago
Conspiracy theory: the missile hit an unpopulated area. Would it have been possible for someone in charge of intercepting incoming missiles to have been in on this bet? I know these things are automated, because human control would be too s
466.
by keeda 7mo ago
Thanks for this. I almost never have the patience for any videos, but this one hooked me and kept me engaged throughout. Worth it for that random "yo mama" joke alone.
467.
by keeda 7mo ago
Actually I find verification pretty lightweight, because I tend to decompose tasks intended for AI to a level where I already know the "shape" of the code in my head, as well as what the test cases should look like. So reviewing t
468.
by keeda 7mo ago
Totally fair. That said, I'll leave a mention of a plausible theory I have for how Elon -- and the rest of the industry have been managing to keep things running with all these layoffs: https://news.ycombinator.com/item
469.
by keeda 7mo ago
I'm not sure I follow. Assuming you mean the zillions of developers that got RIF'd at Twitter, do we know how many were bloat versus working on the T&S and related functions? I tend to believe the latter based on media reports
470.
by keeda 7mo ago
My take is that UBI is the most obvious solution but not one we should count on happening. There is just too much political resistance and a population-level mental block against it, at least in the US. Not to mention, Capitalism doesn&#x27
471.
by keeda 7mo ago
> What about universal health care? I haven't thought this through, but I don't see how you could have UBI without universal healthcare. If the point of UBI is to ensure the most basic necessities are covered, and "basic
472.
by keeda 7mo ago
I dunno, most reports from the time (and a quick Google AI overview just now) mentioned the cuts largely focused on T&S and moderation teams. Even the ML teams he cut reprotedly were working more on safety and integrity issues. Many who
473.
by keeda 7mo ago
Yep, and recent reports from the likes of DORA and DX validate this with data: https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/ai-machine-learning/a...
474.
by keeda 7mo ago
Well not just content moderators, but he gutted Trust and Safety and the content moderation function of the company, which is surprisingly larger than the moderators themselves. Having worked peripherally with similar departments that had m
475.
by keeda 7mo ago
I don't understand this take. Do people think engineers go in to work to turn handcranks to keep the machines running? It's actually a credit to the automation built by the engineers he fired that it kept running! At the time I jo
476.
by keeda 7mo ago
Is there anything from Dan Luu you could point me offhand at about Twitter's culture? The only thing I recall was a blog about technical issues but that didn't seem to have much bearing on the culture. My understanding is Twitter
477.
by keeda 7mo ago
I don't think it will, but I also think it's not all doom and gloom. I think it would be a mistake to look at this solely through the lens of history. Yes, the historical record is unbroken, but if you compare the broad characteri
478.
by keeda 7mo ago
The name was too much of a giveaway. I just hope that somebody who inevitably builds this for real is self-aware enough to name themselves so transparently. About the only reason nobody would actually build this is there's no money in
479.
by keeda 7mo ago
Yep, I call this the "Conway Overhead": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47270142
480.
by keeda 7mo ago
Could we also discourage comments and comment-threads accusing an article of being AI-written? Half the threads these days have a comment that latches onto some LLM-ism in TFA, calls it out, and spawns a whole discussion which gets repetiti

More ›