old_man_cato

A lot of engineers underestimate the learning curve required to jump from IDE to terminal. Multiple generations of engineers were raised on IDEs. It's really hard to break that mental model.

It's pretty important! You could make a case that there's not much else to talk about. I don't love that fact and I wish it would go away but when billionaires are talking about trying to build something that will replace everyone, that's kind of a big topic!

[flagged]

I'll be sure to remind myself of that next time I wish I had more time to spend watching my daughter grow up. Sure, I may miss some seminal moments but the raise I get at the end of the year is just as good.

No sense in responding, people. This person can't be saved. Move on.

What approach is that?

Some people like AI. They should use it, talk about why they like it and use products that leverage it.

Other people don't like it. They should avoid using it, talk about why they don't like it and not use products that leverage it.

Each side's enthusiasm for their perspective can be shared for the purposes of convincing others that theirs is the correct perspective.

That all sounds pretty fine to me?

And I think a lot of people would agree with you.

Dehumanization might be the wrong word. It's certainly anti social technology, though, and that's bad enough.

Ok, yeah, I take the point that one illustration did not obviously precede the other but are likely the coincident result of a worldview.

I don't think it changes anything but thanks for the correction.

https://ai-2027.com/research says that:

AI 2027 relies on several key forecasts that couldn't be fully justified in the main text. Below we present the detailed research supporting these predictions.

You're saying the story was written, then the models were created and the two have nothing to do with one another? Then why does the research section say "Below we present the detailed research supporting these predictions"?

Well, yeah. Obviously.

Sometimes I feel like I'm losing my mind with this shit.

Am I to understand that a bunch of "experts" created a model, they surrounded the findings of that model with a fancy website, replete with charts and diagrams, that website suggests the possibility of some doomsday scenario, the headline of the website says "We predict that the impact of superhuman AI over the next decade will be enormous, exceeding that of the Industrial Revolution." WILL be enormous. Not MIGHT be, they went on some of the biggest podcasts in the world talking about it, a physicist comes along and says yeah this is shoddy work, the clap back is "Well yeah it's an informed guess, not physics or anything"?

What was the point of the website if this is just some guess? What was the point of the press tour? I mean are these people literally fucking insane?

I did. I also had basically unlimited access to pornography and I saw more than one video of someone having their head severed off. But yeah, I played a lot of computer games. That was fun.

The image of a bunch of children in a room gleefully playing with their computers is horror movie type stuff, but because it's in a white room with plants and not their parent's basement with the lights off, it's somehow a wonderful future.

Karpathy and his peer group are some of the most elitist and anti social people who have ever lived. I wonder how history will remember them.

"I’m still a computer scientist, an academic, a straight-ticket Democratic voter, a liberal Zionist, a Jew, etc. (all identities, incidentally, well-enough represented at LessOnline that I don’t even think I was the unique attendee in the intersection of them all)"

Not incidental!

Man, you sound so young. That's not a slight or anything. It just puts into perspective who's on this site commenting so confidently.

We don't know how to use them. That's the entire problem. They were released into the wild by corporations and no one knows how to use them in a way that doesn't harm us.

That's the alignment problem.

"Prompt issue" is just the new "user error". Just passes the blame anywhere other than the flawed value of the tool itself.