Intelligence agencies have seen the writing on the wall with allowing hostile countries unfettered access to their own citizens minds on social media for a while, I would imagine
I don't want to do anything. I think it's a problem with no moral solution. When Elon turned on location data in Twitter and everyone saw all the homegrown American Maga influencer accounts were foreign it should have opened eyes but Noone really cared. You have a choice between closing the internet or letting them brain rot your populace in the open. It's not a theoretical power, nato and the US European led world order is on the cliff of dissolving and none of our adverseries had to fire a single shot at us.
He might be right on the big picture, since we're still far away from ever getting there, but it's just so hard to believe it based on what he writes, when so much of it is so, so, so, obviously incorrect.
Anyone could spend a day with Opus 4.5 and compare it to the frontier model of 12 months prior and immediately see it is a qualitative leap forward. The idea that LLM performance is the same now as it was a year ago is just insane.
Yeah, there are many many critical things to say about the current state of AI, the outrageous investments, the incessant hype and so on. But a lot of these staunch critics just disqualify themselves by throwing out statements that are clearly falsifiable, and if I notice that, why should I believe anything else they have to say.
Can we have a lens that covers the entire display that collimates the light so you're actually focusing on 1-2m away or infinity, like in a VR headset?
Synth id can be removed, run it through an image 2 image model with a reasonably high denoising value or add artificial noise and use another model to denoise and voila. It's effort that probably most aren't doing, but it's certainly possible.
Children of Time so very good, it is in the top 5 of my favorite books of all time. I enjoyed the second one as well, and found the third one to be a bit inconsequential and I didn't re-read it when I re-read part 1 and 2.
Real HN comment right here. "LLMs are a joke" - maybe don't drink the anti-hype kool aid, you'll blind yourself to the capability space that's out there, even if it's not AGI or whatever.
I’ll look past the disrespectful flippant insult on the hope that there’s a brain there too.
They’re a probabalistic phonograph. They can sharpen the funnel for input but they can’t provide judgement on input or resolve ambiguities in your specifications. Teams of human requirements engineers cannot do it. LLMs are not magic. You’re essentially asking it; from my wardrobe pick an outfit for me and make sure it’s the one I would have picked.
If you’re dazzled into thinking LLMs can solve this you just don’t understand transformer architecture and you don’t understand requirements engineering.
You’ll know a proper AI engine when you see it and it doesn’t look like an LLM.
Humans are magic from the LLMs perspective because the token window sizes they would need to approach human experiential disambiguation of requirements would be orders of magnitude larger. Useful in general or replace in general some human activities is a goal post shift that was never the discussion here.
Wasn't transformer 2017? There's been constant AI hype since at least that far back and it's only gotten worse.
If I release a claim once a month that armageddon will happen next month, and then after 20 years it finally does, are all of my past claims vindicated? Or was I spewing nonsense the entire time? What if my claim was the next big pandemic? The next 9.0 earthquake?
Transformers was 2017 and it had some implications on translation (which were in no way overstated), but it took GPT-2 and 3 to kick it off in earnest and the real hype machine started with ChatGPT.
What you are doing however is dismissing the outrageous progress on NLP and by extension code generation of the last few years just because people over hype it.
People over hyped the Internet in the early 2000s, yet here we are.
Well I've been seeing an objectionable amount of what I consider to be hype since at least transformers.
I never dismissed the actual verifiable progress that has occurred. I objected specifically to the hype. Are you sure you're arguing with what I actually said as opposed to some position that you've imagined that I hold?
> People over hyped the Internet in the early 2000s, yet here we are.
And? Did you not read the comment you are replying to? If I make wild predictions and they eventually pan out does that vindicate me? Or was I just spewing nonsense and things happened to work out?
"LLMs will replace developers any day now" is such a claim. If it happens a month from now then you can say you were correct. If it doesn't then it was just hype and everyone forgets about it. Rinse and repeat once every few months and you have the current situation.
reply