upvote
The right tool for the job. There are tasks for which LLMs are unbelievably helpful. In programming, used well, it can 10x your productivity. (Well maybe not literally, but Nx for non-trivial N.) I've seen really good programmers become even faster since the LLM is doing the grunt work for them and the code produced in the end is just as top notch quality as they produced before, just that now they are much faster.

Of course you can misuse it. Produce mountains of unmaintainable slop, full of issues. But that's true for every tool. Before LLMs already, and there will be future tools too.

So, careful with generalizations please. It's not all just dumb.

reply
>just as top notch quality as they produced before, just that now they are much faster.

No, they are not. There write programs like they write prose. There is 100% adherence to grammar and spelling when they write prose, but yet what they write is unintelligible and needlessly verbose.

When they write computer programs there is 100% adherence to good practices, but eventually the program becomes so unintelligible and verbose that only an LLM can make any sense of it going forward. But even then, changes result in more things breaking than they fix. But the number of bugs slashed goes through the roof. Management is happy!

>Of course you can misuse it.

I think the proper way to use it is to use it as a better search tool. But I don't think AI marketing and valuation is going to be sated by such a use case.

reply
Many will disagree and say that anything done by humans is by far superior to anything done by machines. You don't want to correct them, do you?
reply
Machines are extensions of man, it’s not man vs machine but man with machines vs man without.

Well at least as long as they don’t develop consciousness of their own.

reply
The problem is when people ignore or dismiss developments in AI purely out of insecurity or a sense of human superiority. Machines don’t have to be superior to humans to dramatically amplify what humans can do.
reply
Well, it's different "man" as well - lowering the barrier to entry means people with less skill but with a machine, and maybe the gift of the gab, can commercially surpass the previous people, whether or not they have a machine available.
reply
Yes I agree. AI has fundamental problems but a lot of "AI sucks" is the huge, trivial capability for misuse.
reply
Let's go back to caves, this whole "civilisation" thing is not working out.
reply
Is reductio ad absurdum the only argument pro AI crowd can come up with?

Like, why not stick to those products of civilization that don't actively try to replace humans who just so happen to comprise this very civilization?

reply
The trees, man, the trees. We never should have left the trees.
reply
It seems that humanity would have went on a lot longer if we never left the caves, so you might have a point there.
reply
[dead]
reply