This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
AI industry needs to encourage job seekers to pick up AI skills (undefined), in the same way people master Excel to make themselves more employable.
Has anyone in the last 15 years willingly learned excel? It seems like one of those things you have to learn on the job as your boomer managers insist on using it.
Funny thing about "AI skills" that I've noticed so far is that they are actually just skills in the thing you're trying to get AI to help with. If you're good at that, you can often (though not always) get an effective result. Mostly because you can talk about it at a deeper level and catch mistakes the AI makes.
If you have no idea about the thing, it might look competent to you, but you just won't be catching the mistakes.
In that context, I would call them thought amplifiers and pretty effective at the whole "talking about something can help debug the problem, even if the other person doesn't contribute anything of value because you have to look at the problem differently to explain it and that different perspective might make the solution more visible", while also being able to contribute some valueable pieces.
Yeah, very good analogy actually...
I remember back in the day people putting stuff like 'Microsoft Word' under 'skills'. Instead of thinking 'oh good, they will be able to use Word competently', the impression was 'my god, they think Word is a skill worth bragging about, I'm inclined to believe they have no useful skills'.
'Excel skills' on a resume is just so vague, people put it down when they just figured out they can click and put things into a table, some people will be able to quickly roll some complicated formula, which is at least more of a skill (I'd rather program a normal way than try to wrangle some of the abominations I've seen in excel sheets).
Using an LLM is not a skill with a significant acquisition cost. To the extent that it does or does not work, it doesn't really need learning. If anything people who overthink the 'skill' of writing a prompt just end up with stupid superstitions that don't work, and when they first find out that it doesn't work, they just grow new prompt superstitions to add to it to 'fix' the problem.
"Microsoft thinks it has social permission to burn the planet for profit" is all I'm hearing.
Well, they at least have investor permission...which is the only people they care about anyway
Take away:
Well you already lost that or rather never actually had that. You all pushed a broken and incomplete product you need to find a use not us...
"We have to find a compelling use case so we can keep tragedying the commons!"
Dear CEOs. I have revoked my permission. In fact it was never given.
How can you lose social permission that you never had in the first place?
The peasants might light their torches
"Torching" the gas turbines what are on AI companies datacenters would be highly effective. Especially since they are outside and only a fence protects them.
It is so dump what they gas our environment for "AI". It was evil doing it in WW1 and WW2 and it is still today. See:
It is insane.
This guy knows how to translate billionaire dipshit speak.
Datacenters are expensive and soft targets.
Dude, building are pretty hard.
Yeah but it's really easy to hurt their feelings so be mindful
not OP but I believe they're "soft" in the sense that they don't have moats/high electric fences/battalions of armed guards around 24/7
With a clipboard you could probably just walk in and start unplugging things
That's... Not quite true. Usually they take access quite seriously. If in a multi tenant space every space will be separated and the physical cages around the machines locked and monitored.
All the same they are designed to keep small numbers of mostly law abiding people out, not an angry mob with torches.
There's a latency between asking for forgiveness and being demanded to stop.
It's easier to beg for social forgiveness than it is to ask for social permission
Do something useful
What do you mean, that using ChatGPT for a recipe for eggs, sunny side up without any seasoning or toppings and burning up the electricity of a moderate household for a week with my query isn’t useful?
It's not the query that burns through electricity like crazy, it's training the models.
You can run a query yourself at home with a desktop computer, as long as it has enough RAM and compute cells to support the model you're using (think a few high-end GPUs).
Training a model requires a huge pile of computer power though, and the AI companies are constantly scraping the internet to ~~steal~~find more training material
I will try to have a balanced take here:
The positives:
The negatives
Overall I wish the AI bubble burst already
menial tasks that are important such as unit test coverage
This is one of the cases where AI is worse. LLMs will generate the tests based on how the code works and not how it is supposed to work. Granted lots of mediocre engineers also use the "freeze the results" method for meaningless test coverage, but at least human beings have ability to reflect on what the hell they are doing at some point.
You could have it write unit tests as black box tests, where you only give it access to the function signature. Though even then, it still needs to understand what the test results should be, which will vary from case to case.
So I’m the literal author of the Philosophy of Balance, and I don’t see any reason why LLMs are deserving of a balanced take.
This is how the Philosophy of Balance works: We should strive…
But here’s the thing: LLMs and the technocratic elite funding them are a net negative to humanity and the world at large. Therefore, to strive for a balanced approach towards AI puts you on the wrong side of the battle for humanity, and therefore human history.
Pick a side.
They f'd up with electricity rates and hardware price hikes. They were getting away with it by not inconveniencing enough laymen.
Correct, but needs clarification:
Depression referring to the whole economy as the bubble burst.
Acceptance is when the government accepts to bail them out because they're too big and the gov is too dependent on them to let them die.
The five stages of corporate grief:
Denial: "AI will be huge and change everything!"
Anger: "noooo stop calling it slop its gonna be great!"
Bargaining: "please use AI, we spent do much money on it!"
Depression: companies losing money and dying (hopefully)
Acceptance: everyone gives up on it (hopefully)
Which seems like good progress. I feel like they were in denial not three weeks ago.
Translation: Microslop's executives are finally starting to realize that they fucked up.
I'll buy it for 1 dollar.
Textbook definition of a solution searching for a problem.
Must do something useful? You're the one selling the damn thing. You can't build a Pinto and then tell people "we have to stop burning to death or we'll lose permission to keep production faulty cars."
There is something inherently wrong with your product, and you can't even fix it because you're too busy shoving it down everyone's throats.
It's like you're trying to bake cookies using pieces of every plagiarized baking recipe, whether or not they're related. Then, before you've actually tasted the cookies, you're telling everyone to reach into the oven and try using this "basic" cookie to modify and make their own cookies.
Except the cookies haven't even baked yet. And before you've ever tasted a single fully baked cookie, you're announcing modifications to your cookie dough recipe based on feedback from your previously undercooked, improperly made cookies.
Go back to small scale. Let people bake their own cookies at home, and report what they've discovered. Try upscaling those recipes, and see if you can make any parts more efficient.
And quit telling people to eat your tainted cookies that are poisoning everyone, and then telling them that if they don't start enjoying your cookies soon, then you're gonna have to shut down your factory.
Your cookie/Pinto/AI venture deserves to be shut down. Take the L, learn from it, and try again after you figure out how to get it right. Bake a better cookie instead of trying to make better consumers.
They have nothing consumers want.
What does Capitalism™ say about "innovations" that can't deliver results? Filtering out crap that only works on some bullshit paper is the one thing capitalism is supposed to be good at.
Best use for AI is CEO replacement
One small step to the actual solution of "have all the employees vote a CEO every 4 years."
The whole point of "AI" is to take humans OUT of the equation, so the rich don't have to employ us and pay us. Why would we want to be a part of THAT?
AI data centers are also sucking up all the high quality GDDR5 ram on the market, making everything that relies on that ram ridiculously expensive. I can't wait for this fad to be over.
Yeah, cause its totally not end-stage capitalism to invest a trillion dollars into something and THEN figure out what its for.
So...he has something USELESS and he wants everybody to FIND a use for it before HE goes broke?
I'll get right on it.
I really respected Nadella for pushing developer experience and championing opening up the source of .Net. I was like "There's a guy who knows his business and his audience"
This, tho... Come on dude.
Its funny because this is an admission that hes not actually done anything interesting which is a complete pivot from the last two years of him screaming about how good AI is for the last 2 years.
"Cognitive amplifier?" Bullshit. It demonstrably makes people who use it stupider and more prone to believing falsehoods.
I'm watching people in my industry (software development) who've bought into this crap forget how to code in real-time while they're producing the shittiest garbage I've laid eyes on as a developer. And students who are using it in school aren't learning, because ChatGPT is doing all their work - badly - for them. The smart ones are avoiding it like the blight on humanity that it is.
