This is the same “I’ll do my own research, thanks” crowd btw
spoonfeed me harder Silicon Valley VC daddy
Two hours to read a book? How long has it been since he touched a piece of adult physical literature?
ChatGPT please tell me if spot does indeed run.
And not THAT kind of adult literature.
Welp, that’s gonna fuck up my search algorithm for a while.
“Chuck Tingle”. :D
"I ran this Convo through an LLM and it said i should fire and replace you with an LLM for increased productivity and efficiency.
Oh wait, hold on. I read that wrong, it said I should set you on fire…
Well, LLMs can’t be wrong so…"
Imagine being proud of wasting the time drinking coffee instead of reading and understanding for yourself…
Then posting that you are proud of relying on hallucinating, made up slop.
Lmfao.
They also imply that 2+58 minutes is equal to 2 hours
-Look at you. Spent four years in a college. Six months to go through the documentation of the programming language. Another six months to read the manual of the library and practice those example code. Finally, three months to implement the feature and complete the automated tests. Meanwhile, I write a prompt in thirty seconds and AI gives me the whole project, in a programming language I don’t know, and with me not knowing any of the technical detail.
-And somehow you are proud of that?
deleted by creator
The LLM will eventually steal the code, though, and people will claim it invented something.
-And somehow you are proud of that?
Further, I find it EXTREMELY disturbing that someone would desire the secrets of our wonderous journey to be so cynical, solvable and perfectly designed for authoritarian consolidation of power.
We’re not the same. I learned something.
2 minutes + 58 minutes = 2 hours
Bro must have asked the LLM to do the math for him
The additional hour might be the time they have to work so that they can pay for the LLM access.
Because that is another aspect of what LLMs really are, another Silicon Valley rapid-scale venture capital money-pit service hoping that by the time they’ve dominated the market and spent trillions they can turn around and squeeze their users hard.
Only trouble for fighting this with logic is that the market they’re attempting to wipe out is people’s ability to assess data and think critically.
Indeed. Folks right now dont understand that their queries are being 99.9% subsidized by trillions in VC hoping to dominate a market. Tech tale as old as time and people are falling for it hook, line, and sinker
Impressed that he can think of the information he needs in 2 minutes - why even bother researching if you already know what you need …
Seriously though, reading and understanding generally just leaves me with more, very relevant, questions and some answers.
Might be that it takes them an hour to read the summary
you read books and eat vegetables like a loser
my daddy lets me play nintendo 64 and eat cotton candy
we are not the same
deleted by creator
Oh no not the reading! Great thing we had AI to create AI and we did not have to depend on all those computer scientists and engineers whose only skill is to read stuff.
“I used many words to ask the AI to tell me a story using unverified sources to give me the answer I want and have no desire to fact check.”
GIGO.
I mean, how many people fact check a book? Even at the most basic level of reading the citations, finding the sources the book cited, and making sure they say what the book claims they say?
In the vast majority of cases, when we read a book, we trust the editors to fact check.
AI has no editors and generates false statements all the time because it has no ability to tell true statements from false. Which is why letting an AI summarize sources, instead of reading those sources for yourself, introduces one very large procedurally generated point of failure.
But let’s not pretend the average person fact checks anything. The average person decides who they trust and relies on their trust in that person or source rather than fact checking themselves.
Which is one of the many reasons why Trump won.
This is a two part problem. The first is that LLMs are going to give you shoddy results riddled with errors. This is known. Would you pick up a book and take it as the truth if analysis of the author’s work said 50% of their facts are wrong?The second part is that the asker has no intent to verify the LLM’s output, they likely just want the output and be done with it. No critical thinking required. The recipient is only interested in a copy-paste way of transferring info.
If someone takes the time to actually read and process a book with the intent of absorbing and adding to their knowledge, mentally they take the time to balance what they read with what they know and hopefully cross referencing that information internally and gauging it with “that sounds right” at least, but hopefully by reading more.
These are not the same thing. Books and LLMs are not the same. Anyone can read the exact same book and offer a critical analysis. Anyone asking an LLM a question might get an entirely different response depending on minor differences in asking.
Sure, you can copy-paste from a book, but if you haven’t read it, then yeah…that’s like copy-pasting an LLM response. No intent of learning, no critical thought, etc.
while you were studying books, he studied a cup of coffee. TBH I can spend an hour both reading and drinking coffee at the same time idk why it’s got to be its own thing.
Look at this guy over here, bragging about multitasking. Next he’ll tell us he can drink coffee and write multiple prompts in an hour. /s
In other words: I don’t understand why someone would want to think when being lazy is available to them.
I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to say these people are dehumanizing and debasing themselves.
After a few years of this they’ll scarcely be able to think at all.
They are dehumanizing everyone else too.
Can you think of anyone precise and clear enough in their speech that some “needless” repetition and context wouldn’t drastically improve your understanding of what they say?
Can you imagine how upset they would be if you took them by their very word and not what they meant?
In their mind, authors (and probably everyone else) are machines. The kindness of trying to truly understand them is not given. They should be “flawless”.
It also makes them unable to understand art. They think art is when something looks or sounds nice, they have no appreciation for anything deeper than that because for them the art is a commodity alienated from the labor that produced it.
100% that is why they only appreciate realistic art styles and I guess super trendy stuff like ghibli.
And of course, “appreciate” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.
It’s a shame, because classic Ghibli movies are not shallow or inhumane at all. They were not based on trends. Miyazaki could not have made such beautiful films if he had not had real life experiences.
“The dragon is supposed to fall from down the air vent, but, being a dragon, it doesn’t land on the ground,” Miyazaki says. “It attaches itself to the wall, like a gecko. And then—ow!—it falls—thud!—it should fall like a serpent. Have you ever seen a snake fall out of a tree?” He explains that it “doesn’t slither, but holds its position.” He looks around at the animators, most of whom appear to be in their twenties and early thirties. They are taking notes, looking grave: nobody has seen a snake fall out of a tree.
Miyazaki goes on to describe how the dragon—a protean creature named Haku, who sometimes takes this form—struggles when he is pinned down. “This will be tricky,” Miyazaki says, smiling. “If you want to get an idea, go to an eel restaurant and see how an eel is gutted.” The director wriggles around in his seat, imitating the action of a recalcitrant eel. “Have you ever seen an eel resisting?” Miyazaki asks.
“No, actually,” admits a young man with hipster glasses, an orange sweatshirt, and an indoor pallor.
Miyazaki groans. “Japanese culture is doomed!” he says.
Even if we accept that the AI-using guy is correct - that he takes two minutes to formulate the perfect query, and gets a successful response based on that - he had to read books in order to know how to do that.
The people currently using AI were alive before it existed. They gained an education in a more traditional way, which perhaps allows them to take shortcuts using AI.
In the future, if nobody reads books, they will be even less able to prompt AI or to evaluate its responses.
This is a legit worry I have… Lemme ask ChatGPT how I should process this.
Do we want a HG Wells Time Machine future? This is how we get a HG Wells Time Machine future.
it’s like they purposefully try to think as little as possible
looking forward to day when random datacenter where they outsourced their thinking burns down
bro needs 58 minutes to drink coffee
