1,029 karma · joined December 25, 2023
I would rather we don’t allow monopolies since they are so bad for society, regardless of some benefits.
Government funded research and private investment are still a thing, that doesn’t try to break the whole capitalism thing.
Heck I was in a parking lot yesterday and almost got hit by a truck, driver is a very old man.
In terms of safety of AVs and human drivers, AVs need to cause 10x less fatalities than humans do in order to be widely accepted by people. It’s an emotional thing.
Just like these humanoid robots we’re seeing companies develop. If we let them loose in society, would it be ok if they only committed murder 1% less than humans do?
People naturally hold the bar higher for robots and computers. It might be for the lack of accountability. I’m not sure of other reasons why this is
Just like my bogo sort. It’ll get there eventually.
Thanks Tim Sweeney for fighting to open these closed feudal systems.
Thanks to all the Tims!
Works great.
There is a huge differentiating factor for LLMs that makes it not normal: the blatant disregard for the ownership rights of everyone in the world. What other "normal" technology has so callously stolen everything it can without consequence?
The music industry? Artists getting inspired and too closely imitating other artists? I genuinely want to know. And if there is such a suitable example, how did society react? Is there relevant history we can learn from here?
Putting aside other the other problems (capital ownership class salivating at the prospect of using LLM bots instead of humans, reduced critical thinking and traditional learning, environmental impact, other societal changes), this is my main turn-off for LLMs.
Give me a model trained on a responsible dataset (not something our grandparents would scold us for doing) and that I can on consumer hardware then I can use LLMs guilt free.
Incredibly hilarious. Only leet hackers can pull this off though, same as pressing F12 in the browser to hack the mainframe!
Just read the docs and assume the library works as promised.
To clarify, the LLM did not tell me about the specific library I used. I found it the old fashioned way.
I think of LLMs as an autocomplete of the web plus hallucinations. Sometimes it’s faster to use the LLM initially rather than scour through a bunch of sites first.
> What would happen if the "AI" and web search didn't return anything? Would you have stuck with your implementation?
I was fairly certain there must exist some type of algorithm exactly for this purpose. I would have been flabbergasted if I couldn’t find something on the web. But it that failed, I would have asked friends and cracked open the algorithms textbooks.
> I'm not against use of "AI". But this increasing refusal of those who aspire to work in specialist domains like software development to systematically learn things is not great. That's just compounding on an already diminished capacity to process information skillfully.
I understand what you mean, and agree with you. I can also assure you that that is not how I use it.
In python I was scanning 1000’s of files each for thousands of keywords. A naive implementation took around 10 seconds, obviously the largest share of execution time after running instrumentation. A quick ChatGPT led me to Aho-Corasick and String searching algorithms, which I had never used before. Plug in a library and bam, 30x speed up for that part of the code.
I could have asked my knowledgeable friends and coworkers, but not at 11PM on a Saturday.
I could have searched the web and probably found it out.
But the LLM basically auto completed the web, which I appreciate.
The question of whether society should allow companies to perform anti-competitive actions should not be “will we be left with enough choices?”, but should be “is this an anti-competitive action?”
Another purpose of acquisitions is to acquire a new capability that you could not do in house that you do not already compete on.
The sad fact is that being able to work just for personal satisfaction and not just for money is an extremely privileged position.
The only thing I would wish for in a v4 is faster polling rate. I think it’s 1000 hz now. So not the best for gaming.
Why do you think unregulated capitalism will solve the advertising problem? Other than what I am guessing your point is to relying on a large portion to punish bad advertisers and that eventually those companies will do boring adverts.
Clearly the average Joe/Jane is persuadable, and does not have an iron will to never be manipulated.
Clearly unrestrained advertisement is how we got here in the first place.
Looking at you Meta, Apple, X
The flip side is that "taking pride in your work" nearly always results in being taking advantage of from your employer, at least in salaried positions. And if you can spot the social patterns and games played such as valuing employees that work overtime (without pay), on weekends, etc, it is clear that employers love getting more value from employees without compensating them. Work extra hard for 6 months to maybe possibly get a promotion? People are generally waking up to this reality, hence the 'quiet quitting' mindset.
One can both take pride in their work, and respect their time by adhering to their employer-employee contract as written.
Lastly, in the baker example, they have a direct reason to put in their best effort (assuming the baker owns their bakery): they will gain goodwill and repeat customers if they bake very well. A salaried worker is so far removed from being directly compensated for their work. I predict the situation would be very different if salary work got commission based on sales and overtime pay.
Many people would rather keep family secrets secret for a myriad of reasons (with different justifiability)
Captchas are craaaaazy nowadays
/s
Websites are more like books when they have a domain no else else cares about.
My question to HNers is: what is a better system to maximize well being of individuals and society and simultaneously keep on pushing the boundaries of human understanding?
It seems at some point in the future, even if an individual devoted their entire life to their craft, they will barely have enough time to make any contributions. Or will the boundaries of human knowledge always remain reachable with a reasonable amount of education?
Maybe that’s naive, but I’d rather be hopeful than cynical
I read it as: “software is special because its design space is high dimensional, compared to all other engineering disciplines which are limited to 3 spatial dimensions. Large design space leads to ability to mess things up.”
I wholeheartedly agree with you: “real” engineering (where lives are on the line) is hard. Most software that is made is not to control pace makers, air plane autopilot, space shuttles, etc. When we do need to program in these life and death situations, we should look carefully at the real engineers that do this all the time (looking at you self-driving car software).
Since I want programming to be inclusive and not have a bad rap publicly, when a peer says “software is better than all other disciplines because of X, Y, Z” I want to convince them otherwise.
As a leader and teacher with more grey hair every day, I feel this responsibility
DMA seems like a no-brainer for those that support users’ freedom. Since DMA came into effect almost two years ago, can anyone comment on its effectiveness?
Side note, I’m glad the EU takes normal people’s rights seriously. Wish the US was a leader on this too.