MangoCats

joined 2 months ago
[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm about 50/50 between helpful results and "nope, that's not it, either" out of the various AI tools I have used.

I think it very much depends on what you're trying to do with it. As a student, or fresh-grad employee in a typical field, it's probably much more helpful because you are working well trod ground.

As a PhD or other leading edge researcher, possibly in a field without a lot of publications, you're screwed as far as the really inventive stuff goes, but... if you've read "Surely you're joking, Mr. Feynman!" there's a bit in there where the Manhattan project researchers (definitely breaking new ground at the time) needed basic stuff, like gears, for what they were doing. The gear catalogs of the day told them a lot about what they needed to know - per the text: if you're making something that needs gears, pick your gears from the catalog but just avoid the largest and smallest of each family/table - they are there because the next size up or down is getting into some kind of problems engineering wise, so just stay away from the edges and you should have much more reliable results. That's an engineer's shortcut for how to use thousands, maybe millions, of man-years of prior gear research, development and engineering and get the desired results just by referencing a catalog.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 3 points 3 weeks ago

I think a lot depends on where "on the curve" you are working, too. If you're out past the bleeding edge doing new stuff, ChatGPT is (obviously) going to be pretty useless. But, if you just want a particular method or tool that has been done (and published) many times before, yeah, it can help you find that pretty quickly.

I remember doing my Masters' thesis in 1989, it took me months of research and journals delivered via inter-library loan before I found mention of other projects doing essentially what I was doing. With today's research landscape that multi-month delay should be compressed to a couple of hours, frequently less.

If you haven't read Melancholy Elephants, it's a great reference point for what we're getting into with modern access to everything:

https://www.spiderrobinson.com/melancholyelephants.html

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 0 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

If you were too lazy to read three Google search results before, yes... AI is amazing in that it shows you something you ask for without making you dig as deep as you used to have to.

I rarely get a result from ChatGPT that I couldn't have skimmed for myself in about twice to five times the time.

I frequently get results from ChatGPT that are just as useless as what I find reading through my first three Google results.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 4 points 3 weeks ago

AI search is occasionally faster and easier than slogging through the source material that the AI was trained on. The source material for programming is pretty weak itself, so there's an issue.

I think AI has a lot of untapped potential, and it's going to be a VERY long time before people who don't know how to ask it for what they want will be able to communicate what they want to an AI.

A lot of programming today gets value from the programmers guessing (correctly) what their employers really want, while ignoring the asks that are impractical / counterproductive.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 11 points 3 weeks ago

AI makes every aspect where it’s being used a lot more productive and easier.

AI makes every aspect where it's being used well a lot more productive and easier.

AI used poorly makes it a lot easier to produce near worthless garbage, which effectively wastes the consumers' time much more than any "productivity gained" on the producer side.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Machine stitching is objectively worse than hand stitching, but... it's good enough and so much more efficient, so that's how things are done now; it has become the norm.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 18 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

being against progress for that reason is just stupid.

Under the current economic model, being against progress is just self-preservation.

Yes, we could all benefit from AI in some glorious future that doesn't see the AI displaced workers turned into toys for the rich, or forgotten refuse in slums.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 44 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Maybe that's because they're using AI to replace people, and the AI does a worse job.

Meanwhile, the people are also out of work.

Lose - Lose.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 7 points 3 weeks ago

I have heard Arkansas compared to Cuba and been found similar in terms of economic development.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 3 points 3 weeks ago

The only time that doesn't seem f-ed up is when you stand outside the processing plants, here or there...

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 13 points 3 weeks ago

We're back to the chicken tax... it's the reason why 'Muricans all drive big pickup trucks:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax

view more: ‹ prev next ›