cheevly

Maybe like… focus on the actual content instead of perceived writing patterns? Crazy I know.

There are at least a dozen scaling laws for AI right now. It’s improving on so many different fronts that people don’t seem to comprehend.

The irony of this article is thick.

I'm pretty sure programmers weren't the ones writing the specs in the past...

Lacking willpower sounds biological to me... do you disagree??

If yours cant, then I implore you to find better AI mediation tools.

GPT literally generates perfect code for me in languages that do not exist anywhere in its training set, so I’m not sure how you’ve achieved this level of failure.

Ever since the first Davinci model of GPT-3 ive literally been using LLMs daily. It was an indispensable tool for me from the very beginning and despite 10,000+ hours of usage and research, I still feel like ive barely cracked the surface of whats possible with current genai tech.

When I use AI to produce a work, it’s human-made, just the same as when I use a computer to synthesize digital works using human-developed automation tools like word processors. All built on top of operating systems that manipulate bytes of all natural human-made data.

This is a great answer.

Yeaahh, that you assert that makes your point says a lot.

I think the prevailing answer is lack of evidence, with things like suffering / death and stuff as a close second.

Imagine classifying Apple as AI experts. You are lost my dude.

It really sounds like you’re doing it wrong (using multi-agent patterns of yesteryear).

The proper way is to use multiple agents for work involving very large context, and splitting the context amongst them. It effectively enables encapsulation and separation of concerns, which yields much clearer benefits when working at scale.

Agents are perfectly capable of learning. Why would the model need to learn? The harness and tooling are all that matter.

This is my experience. Though ice been writing LLM harnesses, agents, tooling, etc for 5 years now and believe it requires several hundred hours of experience before understanding how to consistently outperform at scale.

These types of comments help demonstrate first-hand how human reasoning stacks up against what an LLM would say in this situation.

A lot of us have been doing this for over a year now.

What would you even need to see? I struggle to find things that I cant do at scale with AI, and it’s dumbfounding to read posts about people that are unconvinced.

Because markdown can totally do all the stuff that this article is about. Did you even read it?

This is the correct response.

This day is probably not long off. My prediction is before the end of 2028.

False

I dont know wtf you want, but I know what I want. The rest of us are generating all the apps we’ve ever needed, customized to our exact taste.

Wtf are you even talking about? Sam has zero stake in OpenAI.

He pays what the government requests of him (which is a lot, imo). He can’t pay more than the law mandates. So therefore he is already paying his fair share.

Oh nooo not my precious daaaata

Imagine associating god with some minerals.

I cannot find a single aspect of this file that even remotely hints at 'neurosymbolic' intelligence. And the post by Gary Marcus truly exhibits the type of person he is.

How would you know if a good blog post is from AI?