hansmayer

Is anyone even surprised at this point? Probably a long chain of AI-"summarised" emails flowing back and forth.

> internal features that look like learned concepts, planning, and something resembling goal-directed reasoning.

It's always so un-specific. Resembles this, seems that, almost such, danger that... A lot of magical thinking coming from AI-researchers who have hit the ceiling with a legacy technology that exists since 1940s and simply won't start reasoning on it's own, no matter how much GPUs they burn.

> Calling the outputs random is wrong in a specific way, the distribution is extraordinarily structured.

No, it's actually very correct in a very specific way. Ask any programmer using the parrots, and lately the "quality" has deteriorated so much, that coupled with the incoming price hikes, many will just forfeit the technology, unless someone else is carrying the cost, such as their employer. But as an employer, I also don't want to carry the costs for a technology which benefits as ever less.

Are you telling me that inference costs did not go down, as the AI crowd keeps preaching?

They've been like that for a while actually, I think at least since the big hype around ChatGPT 4.5 (or was it 5?) and that underwhelming, lukewarm, oversanitised presentation by Altman and his team.

I mean let's be realistic - all that we know about the "mythical" Mythos is the carefully curated and release stuff by the Anthropic's PR team. Is it really a huge leap they are making it to be? I doubt it. In fact I bet if it was indeed that powerful and dangerous, as they imply, they'd find a way to release it immediately, devastate OpenAI and DeepSeek and secure a leading position in the market. Why is it not happening? I suspect because Dario is again at it, peddling his bullshit.

In a way, this is good news. I am expecting to see a lot less of AI-boosters claiming that they are "productive in ways you don't understand", now that they'll have to dish out upwards of a few thousand bucks per month for whatever PoCs they are building. And the excited hired middle managers and CEOs spending other people's money will have to be much more careful about their budget starting June.

> Did anyone really expect AI to be cheap?

Yes, a lot of people (not me). Why? Well because that was the whole value proposition of these companies, relentlessly pushed by their PR and most of the media- rememmber it was something something Pocket PhDs, massive unemployment etc?

Errr... No. Please take this bullshit propaganda to a billionaires twitter feed.

> with screenshots broadly showing

Why is it always so un-specific with you AI-boosting bunch, whenever you get pressed for concrete results? Suddenly it's not so magical any more, but merely screenshots showing "broadly" the progress, or it's the Nth version of a note-taking app, or something you merely did for a demo presentation. But nothing ever of use with you folks.

I mean did you really need someone on HN to tell you that? Makes me wonder what else have you offloaded onto the statistical parrot.

> Much of the intellectual work is, in fact, intellectual labor.

Not surprisimg, because the two words you used are synonyms. Who did ever classify mathematical work as creative? Kids in third grade math class?

> that LLM far outperforms human.

LLMs only outperform humans in creating loads of bullshit. 6 years in and they remain shiny toys for easily impressionable idiots.

I dunno man. He sounded like he found a new friend in 'him' to me. And it was genuinely hilarious. It took me a while to stop laughing.

Oh we have a fan here. Yeah, I am sorry too that you don't have any arguments so you had to pull the ole "asshole" card. Did you feed the comments into your LLM to ask for a clever retort, but the LLM just gave up and told you to call me an asshole? That would be very funny.

+1 and - The title has that weird corpo media "here is why you should not quiet quit" vibe to it, doesn'it?

The article itself is also probably an attempt at marketing the LLMs too. They are now quite desperate. Expect to see a flood of such "independent" articles over the next 12 mo ths.

I mean we have all met that one cretin who will discuss over chat by pasting bulletpoints from an LLM. No wonder some of them think it is a living person!

> he explicitly pushed into "lets have V0 game play loop finished,

> he even helped me build the lore. These have been one of the most fun times using a computer in a long time.

Such a warm, touching story about a friendship between a grown up man and his neural network. But at least I had a good, roaring laugh reading this nonsense, thank you for that!

Sounds a lot like that disgusti g corporate press propaganda tbh, of the "eat less avocado toast if you cant afford rent" variant. Is the AI mainstream that desperate in their relentlesss push for adoption of their bullshit text generators?

Couldn't you instruct your LLM to make the starting dir configurable?

+100 for this comment.

> If you think early days of GH Copilot are remotely relevant to what is happening now

Let's learn some English grammar, I had said: "I've been using GH Copilot since early days" . Translated from plain English: "have been using..." = *an action or state starting in the past AND continuing UP TO the present time*. I did not say "I used it only during the early days and never again". Plus my team. Honestly - and it's only a hypothesis at this point in time I cannot prove, but I meet more and more people whose usage of LLMs seems to be seriously impacting their reading comprehension and writing skills. Do some LLM-detox, I mean this without any kind of disrespect.

> What kind of smug asshole says something like this?

I've also noticed over the years, the folks who get this offended are usually those who are uncertain about their opinion. I simply found your statement cute, that's all. You are obviously in the early stages of using it and I am assuming using it to alleviate your own little, relatively simple tasks in your job which otherwise would have been overburdening for you. It's only human to try and do so, but it hardly describes "productivity" the way you seem to think it does.

You're funny mate :) Read a bit through my comments' history. I've been using "these tools" before folks like you even heard of the term LLM. But I guess I am not easily impressed.

Give a man a hammer...and tell him his performance review outcome is tied to his use of that hammer -> then watch every problem being, for the lack of a better term, nailed down . With the said hammer of course.

How so what? 6 years in, we're still looking for that flood of new innovative apps and one-man billion dollar startups. Instead we got a flood of sh*t content, embarassing outages and "AI workflows" - which no one can quite describe. Or did you have something else in mind?

In the absence of real productive use cases for AI agents, I guess plugins to anthropomorphise them fruther will have to do.

I am basing it on self-reports of advanced users on popular platforms such as reddit, reporting of Ed Zitron AND the official affidavit of the Anthropic CFO in relation to their court-filed complaint against DoD (for being excluded), stating that the total revenue of Anthropic since its founding and TO DATE had been at meager 5 Billion dollars. So wasting hundreds of billions of dollars per year to make a cumulative revenue of 5B to date does not quite sound like a financially sound business to me.

> but you really should give it a try.

That's cute, I hope you enjoy that high, it's really impressive at first - fyi -I've been using GH Copilot since early days (invited to early access) AND paying it for my entire company ever since MS published the first commercial plan. All the way to the latest entshittification drama with Opus 4.6 being pulled away and Opus 4.7 taxed at 7.5x rate. Yeah, its great for quick tryouts or similar. But using it in wider scope, with complex reqs and dynamic environment? Complete shitshow.

> This was a reasonable position to hold 9 months ago

Browse my comment history. There were people just like you, 6, 9 or 12 months ago telling me exactly the same. Some also threatening that I would "be the first to go away". Like I said, cute actually :) You know in January Dario Amodei announced again, AI would write ALL code in 6 months. Do you see it happening?

:) Wow you are getting ahead of yourself aren't you. LLMs are dangerous tools that any moron nowadays has access to. They can fabricate images of wolves roaming the streets, hallucinate fake arguments that sound really convincing and even coach people into committing a suicide, as you probably heard in the recent at least a dozen cases. I can't quite see the comparison you are making. It's not like you have access to a nuclear reactor or whatever other dangerous technology you wanted to lump in with it, at your finger tips, do you? This is because those other dangerous technologies are carefully managed. So now follow where I am taking this, I'll be explain it really simple. Guns are really easily accessible to people in large parts of the US. So some people will use guns to kill other people. Sometimes its an accident, like kids playing with daddy's gun and shooting their sibling. Some people argue that guns should be restricted, as it would reduce such accidents and incidents. But some other people say "guns dont kill people - people kill people". Now LLMs are as a dangerous technology, accessible to most anyone not just in the US, but around the world. Also easier to use. So anyone with basic command of language and ability to clank on a keyboard can "use" it. To the point that some people not only harm others, like this Korean champ, but also themselves, like those people who were goaded into committing suicide. Now my point was, and it should not have been that hard to see, that your argument is precisely of the "guns don't kill people" variety. The point is, if the chatbots that we pompously resigned to call "artificial intelligence" make mistakes 30-40% of the time, and we use them to verify information, they are dangerous and should not be allowed to use for such purposes as misleading generating public. Because that is dangerous. Now, in your small little selfish world, maybe they are "everywhere", meaning, you can offload your thinking to them, and maybe you even use them to write emails and summarise other people emails so you don't completely drown in your boring office job. But it does not mean you should compare them to anything you listed above. Those small "benefits" do not account for overall shittines of this so-called technology.

I am not sure, but it probably isn't because I wanted to sound smart by using smart sounding words :)

???