zlacker

>>tablet+(OP)
I’d love to see the authors of effusive praise of generative AI like this provide the proof of the unlimited powers of their tools in code. If GAI (or agents, or whatever comes next …) is so effective it should be quite simple to prove that by creating an AI only company and in short order producing huge amounts of serviceable code to do useful things. So far I’ve seen no sign of this, and the best use case seems to be generating text or artwork which fools humans into thinking it has coherent meaning as our minds love to fill gaps and spot patterns even where there are none. It’s also pretty good at reproducing things it has seen with variations - that can be useful.

So far in my experience watching small to medium sized companies try to use it for real work, it has been occasionally useful for exploring apis, odd bits of knowledge etc, but overall wasted more time than it has saved. I see very few signs of progress.

The time has come for llm users to put up or shut up - if it’s so great, stop telling us and show and use the code it generated on its own.

>>grey-a+ba
Honestly it’s really unfortunate that LLMs seem to have picked up the same hype men that attached themselves to blockchains etc.

LLMs are very useful. I use them as a better way to search the web, generate some code that I know I can debug but don’t want to write and as a way to conversationally interact with data.

The problem is the hype machine has set expectations so high and refused criticism to the point where LLMs can’t possibly measure up. This creates the divide we see here.

>>ofjcih+cc
There's not much riding on convincing the broader public that AI is the real deal before it's proved itself beyond the shadow of any doubt. There's nothing they can do to prepare at this point.