←back to thread

627 points cratermoon | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.209s | source
Show context
resonious ◴[] No.44461908[source]
I agree with a lot of this at the outset, but don't really like the gloomy outlook. I don't think there's much to gain by writing off all this unfortunate stuff as people being stupid and greedy. I mean sure, that may be true, but you can flip it around and say that it's impressive that we have it as good as we do despite having to co-exist with stupidity and greed. Better yet, you can see it as a challenge to overcome.

And I'm not the only one saying this but - the bit about LLMs is likely throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Yes the "AI-ification" of everything is horrible and people are shoehorning it into places where it's not useful. But to say that every single LLM interaction is wrong/not useful is just not true (though it might be true if you limit yourself to only freely available models!). Using LLMs effectively is a skill in itself, and not one to be underestimated. Just because you failed to get it to do something it's not well-suited to doesn't mean it can't do anything at all.

Though the conclusion (do things, make things) I do agree with anyway.

replies(4): >>44462019 #>>44462607 #>>44463073 #>>44464440 #
1. ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 ◴[] No.44462019[source]
> every single LLM interaction is wrong/not useful

I think it is defense mechanism, you see it everywhere, and you have to wonder, "why are people thinking this way?".

I think those with an ethical or related argument deserve to be heard, but opposite of that, it seems like full blinders, ignoring the reality presented before us.