←back to thread

Andrej Karpathy: Software in the era of AI [video]

(www.youtube.com)
1480 points sandslash | 1 comments | 19 Jun 25 00:33 UTC | HN request time: 0.224s | source
Show context
anythingworks ◴[19 Jun 25 01:51 UTC] No.44314766[source]▶
loved the analogies! Karpathy is consistently one of the clearest thinkers out there.

interesting that Waymo could do uninterrupted trips back in 2013, wonder what took them so long to expand? regulation? tailend of driving optimization issues?

noticed one of the slides had a cross over 'AGI 2027'... ai-2027.com :)

replies(2): >>44314822 #>>44315438 #
AlotOfReading ◴[19 Jun 25 02:06 UTC] No.44314822[source]▶
You don't "solve" autonomous driving as such. There's a long, slow grind of gradually improving things until failures become rare enough.
replies(1): >>44314866 #
petesergeant ◴[19 Jun 25 02:19 UTC] No.44314866[source]▶
I wonder at what point all the self-driving code becomes replaceable with a multimodal generalist model with the prompt “drive safely”
replies(4): >>44314937 #>>44315054 #>>44315210 #>>44316357 #
anon7000 ◴[19 Jun 25 03:34 UTC] No.44315210[source]▶
Very advanced machine learning models are used in current self driving cars. It all depends what the model is trying to accomplish. I have a hard time seeing a generalist prompt-based generative model ever beating a model specifically designed to drive cars. The models are just designed for different, specific purposes
replies(1): >>44315369 #
tshaddox ◴[19 Jun 25 04:13 UTC] No.44315369[source]▶
I could see it being the case that driving is a fairly general problem, and this models intentionally designed to be general end up doing better than models designed with the misconception that you need a very particular set of driving-specific capabilities.
replies(3): >>44315469 #>>44316063 #>>44318089 #
1. mannicken ◴[19 Jun 25 12:37 UTC] No.44318089[source]▶
Speed and Moore's law. You don't need to just make a decision without hallucinations, you need to do it fast enough for it to propagate to the power electronics and hit the gas/brake/turn the wheel/whatever. Over and over and over again on thousands of different tests.

A big problem I am noticing is that the IT culture over the last 70 years has existed in a state of "hardware gun get faster soon". And over the last ten years we had a "hardware cant get faster bc physics sorry" problem.

The way we've been making software in the 90s and 00s just isn't gonna be happening anymore. We are used to throwing more abstraction layers (C->C++->Java->vibe coding etc) at the problem and waiting for the guys in the fab to hurry up and get their hardware faster so our new abstraction layers can work.

Well, you can fire the guys in the fab all you want but no matter how much they try to yell at the nature it doesn't seem to care. They told us the embedded c++-monkeys to spread the message. Sorry, the moore's law is over, boys and girls. I think we all need to take a second to take that in and realize the significance of that.

[1] The "guys in the fab" are a fictional character and any similarity to the real world is a coincidence.

[2] No c++-monkeys were harmed in the process of making this comment.