InsideOutSanta

I'll cancel my OpenAI plan after this billing cycle. Let's see how this plays out.

It's not, I'm just pointing out that LLMs won't make that mistake.

You could ask an LLM what 1+1 is, and the number of times it says "3" is so small that it makes no sense to worry about it. It will phrase the response differently each time; that's the nondeterminism. But it won't say "3".

> then major question here is why are we building out huge amounts of infrastructure at unsustainable spending levels to enable LLMs to make the same mistakes as humans.

Yes, if we ignore everything else, that seems like a reasonable question. But let's not ignore everything else, like the fact that LLMs are much more productive than humans and likely already make fewer mistakes than the average programmer.

It must have been a huge shock when you were suddenly transported from a working parallel universe into ours back in 2024.

> If I give away food I have a duty not to poison you. It doesn’t matter you didn’t pay for it.

If I invite you to eat at my house, there is no health inspector and no government. I'm just giving you free food. Would you agree that I have a duty not to poison you in that case?

That's such an obvious category mistake that I'm not sure how to respond. It almost feels like a bad-faith interpretation of Wichary's original point.

Also, I feel like the LLMs would have done better if they had started from scratch each time, rather than being burdened by the output from the previous attempt.

That's a non-sequitur.

"Nestle is a great company, considering how much people love their chocolate."

They're both pretty horrible, but I find it difficult to find arguments for why Anthropic is worse than OpenAI, other than their doomtrolling. Which, in the grand scheme of things, doesn't even register.

Edit: forgot about the SpaceX thing.

By raising it from investors.

I'm sure they're doing all kinds of terrible things, like all major companies. I just can't help but like them. Also, this model looks great, and I'll give their subscription a shot next month.

As a society, we decide what we value, and then we pay for it. If you don't like what the group decides, it's your choice to move elsewhere.

So if anyone is wondering if this is just nostalgia, or if the game actually holds up, it's the latter. Just play it.

Everything about this blog post makes me think that I don't want to work with him, not just the "act with urgency" claim. The whole idea that he thought this was a blog post he should write and publish makes me not want to work with him.

I think there is a worthwhile idea in this blog post, which is that you should generally not strongly commit to any specific solution to a problem because you will learn new information while working on the solution, and that it is fine to say, "I was wrong; let's take a step back and rethink this."

But if you were to write a useful post about this, you'd focus on how to decide when to change your approach and when to stick to it, because always rethinking your approach can lead to infinite churn without any releases.