At best, perhaps it's an overengineered way to force humans to rigorously validate every action... which the humans are all very hostile to doing.
> [Architecture page] Reasoning is Read-Only: Input=Data, not Instructions
This doesn't make make sense unless the "reasoning" is regular executable code, and then someone still needs to audit the code whenever it changes. The core LLM algorithms simply don't have room for the distinction.
> Complex workflows broken down into encrypted graph segments
Grandiosity++, where does "the architecture" actually end?
I think using an absurd amount of power to train a neural network on stolen data which is then used to perform mundane tasks and performs significantly worse then if done manually. If anything LLMs is one of the least impressive, yet most annoying technological achievement this century.
I'm unconvinced that AI will make us all dumber. In the public perception, at least among students, AI is viewed as a cheating tool. What kinds of students gravitate towards cheating tools to complete their coursework?
On the other hand, the opportunity for AI to act as a personal tutor, meeting you at your own skill and knowledge level, is limitless.
Typically speaking, the ones that run companies.
> On the other hand, the opportunity for AI to act as a personal tutor, meeting you at your own skill and knowledge level, is limitless.
To be especially contrarian here, people said the exact same thing about the internet. That it would let you connect with anyone and truly evolve your knowledge and skill. It may be true for an extremely small minority of people but for most the reality was almost exactly the opposite. People willingly became dumber, embedding themselves into conspiracy and ways to hide from reality.
* It's not going to go away and will only get more sophisticated whether we like it or not.
* It has legitimate super powers that can enable people do things that would either be impossible or insanely expensive.
I've been fascinated by tech my whole life and have watched various waves of technology transform society:
* solid state electronics enabling portability and functionality hitherto not possible
* integrated circuits bringing down the cost and increasing the capability of electronics, including microprocessors
* the personal computer revolution
* mobile telephony
* the internet
* smart phones
* AI
Most of those wonders have come with significant societal costs (e.g., silicon valley promised a revolutionary new industry without pollution, but instead gave us multiple superfund sites to clean up the toxic materials they haphazardly dumped without care, etc.)
We can't stop AI but we should try to have serious conversations how how to live in a non-dystopian world that it threatens to bring us. The small flaw with that idea is that those in power have no fucks to give in that regard and will sell out humanity if it means they can have the deluxe bunker package and enough slaves to serve them.
There, fixed that for you.
I'm not saying the haters have zero point, but I find AI far more useful than not. I think so do most people. If I walk into any coffee shop and look over the at the screens of the people next to me, I see all asking AI questions and getting something positive from it. So I don't think "most cases" is correct.
...
Everybody's Weirded Out by non-Latin Bible–Except the People Who Foist It on Us
Everybody's Weirded Out by Printing Press–Except the People Who Foist It on Us
Everybody's Weirded Out by Radio–Except the People Who Foist It on Us
Everybody's Weirded Out by Television–Except the People Who Foist It on Us
Everybody's Weirded Out by Computers–Except the People Who Foist Them on Us
Everybody's Weirded Out by Internet–Except the People Who Foist It on Us
Everybody's Weirded Out by Smartphones–Except the People Who Foist Them on Us
Everybody's Weirded Out by AI–Except the People Who Foist It on Us
...
0100110001101111011011110110101100100000010000010111010000100000010011010110010100101100001000000100100100100000010010000110000101110110011001010010000001100001011011100010000001001111011100000110100101101110011010010110111101101110001000000100000101100010011011110111010101110100001000000111010001101000011001010010000001000011011101010111001001110010011001010110111001110100001000000101010001101000011010010110111001100111001000010010000100110001
Each of them did have some fairly serious downsides that required social policy to correct. I don't want to go back to the era of Charles dickens.
I don’t think it makes sense as an analogy to AI, however.
I don’t think the analogy makes any sense whatsoever either.
But I always swore I would never buy another iPad until Apple added one key feature: support for multiple user profiles.
Can’t understand why they’ve never done this. Even Apple TV has user profiles now. Perhaps they think they will sell less iPads if family members can share them.
He seems to have changed his mind now that he owns a major AI company.
"read Kant and found it to be dense and impenetrable...an AI generated summary would have helped"
followed by "Would it have improved comprehension? No."
Why? Because "research says so."
Wut?
(still waiting for one or more HN commenters to freak out because the article has gasp! multiple em-dashes)
I find it hard to imagine having a chatbot fix your broken SQL query or summarize some event be experienced as gross.
This piece, by a defense analyst formerly at RAND, is mainly noting major yet-unsolved concerns such as AI output being unoriginal (fundamentally due to next-word prediction), the output polluting future training (garbage in garbage out), and errors only being caught by experts (cf. the Gell-Mann amnesia effect). The piece intends to warn about strategic issues if our government and experts intertwine AI into their decision making without first solving these. While public opinion is being noted, it’s not the only thing discussed here.
AI im not sure of because it generates so much slop and anyone not already deep into a topic or field are unlikely to be able to recognize what parts are useful and what parts are common misconceptions or hallucinations.
Search engines are certainly worse tho, the first 20 hits on certain topics these days are AI articles that lack the needed details in favor of verbose generalizations or have questionable figures that other slop makes difficult to verify.
A lot of potential that's currently unrealized. It takes a student to swim upstream to get there. The convenience of cognitive offloading is difficult to say no to. For evidence, I see it everywhere at work, including (at least in some cases) in my own work, for matters I don't care to invest effort in learning because it's a one-off.
The rates of AI use show it far exceeds the rate of good old-fashioned cheating, and not an equivalency between them.
So I am convinced AI will make the ~80% dumber, at least until there are excellent teaching products and changes to teaching practices that end up making that 'AI as a personal tutor' the norm. In the absence of the actual right answer -- actual people as personal tutors with qualified, well-paid teachers and right-sized classrooms -- an AI as personal tutor is extremely scalable and would allow productive 'struggle' learning.
'Our minds can be hijacked': tech insiders who fear a smartphone dystopia
9 years ago 878 points 386 comments https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15421704
The Presence of One’s Own Smartphone Reduces Available Cognitive Capacity (2017)
6 years ago 874 points 369 comments https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24519684
Reading on smartphone affects sigh generation, brain activity, and comprehension
4 years ago 320 points 124 comments https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30181560
etc
I don't think I need to present examples of "social media bad" from here.
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
sergiomattei•51m ago
I don’t know, I find myself doing things I would’ve never done before AI.
I find myself doing more projects outside of work.
I discover new problem domains and are less afraid of tackling the unknown.
I code in languages I don’t know and start learning how they work.
I can get anything explained to me, at any time, in a somewhat coherent manner, by a tutor that won’t get tired or annoyed.
Look— I’m not exactly thinking AI is free of criticism, but it’s definitely a revolution in access to information and at least to me that’s a big deal.
reticulates•45m ago
Did you mean: Google?
socalgal2•37m ago