←back to thread

317 points laserduck | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
EgoIncarnate ◴[] No.42157406[source]
The article seems to be be based on the current limitations of LLMs. I don't think YC and other VCs are betting on what LLMs can do today, I think they are betting on what they might be able to do in the future.

As we've seen in the recent past, it's difficult to predict what the possibilities are for LLMS and what limitations will hold. Currently it seems pure scaling won't be enough, but I don't think we've reached the limits with synthetic data and reasoning.

replies(4): >>42157469 #>>42157563 #>>42157650 #>>42157754 #
DeathArrow ◴[] No.42157469[source]
>The article seems to be be based on the current limitations of LLMs. I don't think YC and other VCs are betting on what LLMs can do today, I think they are betting on what they might be able to do in the future.

Do we know what LLMs will be able to do in the future? And even if we know, the startups have to work with what they have now, until that future comes. The article states that there's not much to work with.

replies(1): >>42157664 #
brookst ◴[] No.42157664[source]
Show me a successful startup that was predicated on the tech they’re working with not advancing?
replies(4): >>42157914 #>>42158080 #>>42158193 #>>42159132 #
1. rsynnott ◴[] No.42158193{3}[source]
Most successful startups were able to make the thing that they wanted to make, as a startup, with existing tech. It might have a limited market that was expected to become less limited (a web app in 1996, say), but it was possible to make the thing.

This idea of “we’re a startup; we can’t actually make anything useful now, but once the tech we use becomes magic any day now we might be able to make something!” is basically a new phenomenon.