←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 #
layer8 ◴[] No.42157754[source]
You could replace “LLM” in your comment with lots of other technologies. Why bet on LLMs in particular to escape their limitations in the near term?
replies(1): >>42157912 #
samatman ◴[] No.42157912[source]
Because YCombinator is all about r-selecting startup ideas, and making it back on a few of them generating totally outsized upside.

I think that LLMs are plateauing, but I'm less confident that this necessarily means the capabilities we're using LLMs for right now will also plateau. That is to say it's distinctly possible that all the talent and money sloshing around right now will line up a new breakthrough architecture in time to keep capabilities marching forward at a good pace.

But if I had $100 million, and could bet $200 thousand that someone can make me billions on machine learning chip design or whatever, I'd probably entertain that bet. It's a numbers game.

replies(1): >>42158286 #
1. namaria ◴[] No.42158286[source]
> But if I had $100 million, and could bet $200 thousand that someone can make me billions on machine learning chip design or whatever, I'd probably entertain that bet. It's a numbers game.

Problem with this reasoning is twofold: start-ups will overfit to getting your money instead of creating real advances; competition amongst them will drive up the investment costs. Pretty much what has been happening.