Hacker News Reader

Comment by km144 | Hacker News Reader

I'm not convinced that LLMs in their current state are really making anyone's lives much better though. We really need more research applications for this technology for that to become apparent. Polluting the internet with regurgitated garbage produced by a chat bot does not benefit the world. Increasing the productivity of software developers does not help to the world. Solving more important problems should be the priority for this type of AI research & development.

View on HN

The explosion of garbage content is a big issue and has radically changed the way I use the web over the past year: Google and DuckDuckGo are not my primary tools anymore, instead I am now using specialized search engines more and more, for example, if I am looking for something I believe can be found in someone's personal blog I just use Marginalia or Mojeek, if I am searching for software issues I use GitHub's search, general info straight to Wikipedia, tech reviews HN's Algolia etc.

It might sound a bit cumbersome but it's actually super easy if you assign search keywords in your browser: for instance if I am looking for something on GitHub I just open a new tab on Firefox and type "gh tokio".

LLM's have been extremely useful for me. They are incredibly powerful programmers, from the perspective of people who aren't programmers.

Just this past week claude 3.7 wrote a program for us to use to quickly modernize ancient (1990's) proprietary manufacturing machine files to contemporary automation files.

This allowed us to forgo a $1k/yr/user proprietary software package that would be able to do the same. The program Claude wrote took about 30 mins to make. Granted the program is extremely narrow in scope, but it does the one thing we need it to do.

This marks the third time I (a non-progammer) have used an LLM to create software that my company uses daily. The other two are a test system made by GPT-4 and an android app made by a mix of 4o and claude 3.5.

Bumpers may be useless and laughable to pro bowlers, but a godsend to those who don't really know what they are doing. We don't need to hire a bowler to knock over pins anymore.

I've also been toying with Claude Code recently and i (as en eng, ~10yr) think they are useful for pair programming the dumb work.

Eg as i've been trying Claude Code i still feel the need to babysit it with my primary work, and so i'd rather do it myself. However while i'm working if it could sit there and monitor it, note fixes, tests and documentation and then stub them in during breaks i think there's a lot of time savings to be gained.

Ie keep the doing simple tasks that it can get right 99% of the time and get it out of the way.

I also suspect there's context to be gained in watching the human work. Not learning per say, but understanding the areas being worked on, improving intuition on things the human needs or cares about, etc.

A `cargo lint --fix` on steroids is "simple" but still really sexy imo.

Being able to quickly get a script for some simple automation, defining source and target formats in plain English, has been a huge help. There is simply no way I'm going to remember all that stuff as someone who doesn't program regularly, so the previous way to deal with it was to do it all manually. It was quicker than doing remedial Python just to forget it all again.

I think that's great for work and great for corporations. I use AI at my job too, and I think it certainly does increase productivity!

How does any of this make the world a better place? CEOs like Sam Altman have very lofty ideas about the inherent potential "goodness" of higher-order artificial intelligence that I find thus far has not borne out in reality, save a few specific cases. Useful is not the same as good. Technology is inherently useful, that does not make it good.

> Solving more important problems should be the priority for this type of AI research & development.

Which problem spaces do you think are underserved in this aspect?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com