• msage@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      What is your definition of reasoning?

      It’s not shoving AI slop into it again to get a new AI slop? Until it stops, because it reached the point where it’s just done?

      What ancient wizzardry do you use for your reasoning at home if not that?

      But like look, we’ve had shit like this since forever, it’s increasingly obvious that most people will cheer for anything, so the new ideas just get bigger and bigger. Can’t wait for the replacement, I dare not even think about what’s next. But for the love of fuck, don’t let it be quantums. Please, I beg the world.

        • msage@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s a bit fucking expensive for a grammar tool.

          I get that it gets logarithmically more expensive for every last bit of grammar, and some languages have very ridiculous nonsensical rules.

          But I wish it had some broader use, that would justify its cost.

            • msage@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              But that won’t happen, since the bubble rose on promises of gorillions of returns, and those have not manifested yet.

              We are so fucking stupid, I hate this timeline.

              • vintageballs@feddit.org
                link
                fedilink
                Deutsch
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                I work in this field. In my company, we use smaller, specialized models all the time. Ignore the VC hype bubble.

                • msage@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  There are many interesting AI applications, LLM or otherwise, but I’m talking about the IT bubble, that grows so big it will finally consume the industry. If it ever pops, the correction will not be pretty. For anyone.

                  I evaded the BS for now, but it feels like I won’t be able to hide much longer. And it saddens me. I used to love IT :(

      • MagicShel@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Most of us have no use for quantum computers. That’s a government/research thing. I have no idea what the next disruptive technology will be. They are working hard on AGI, which has the potential to be genuinely disruptive and world changing, but LLMs are not the path to get there and I have no idea whether they are anywhere close to achieving it.

        • msage@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          Surprise surprise, most of us have no use for LLMs.

          And yet everyone and their gradma is using it for everything.

          People asked GPT who would the next pope be.

          Or which car to buy.

          Or what’s a good local salary.

          I’m so fucking tired of all the shit.

    • reksas@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      ai is just too nifty word even if its gross misuse of the term. large language model doesnt roll of the tongue as easily.

      • vintageballs@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        Deutsch
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The goalpost has shifted a lot in the past few years, but in the broader and even narrower definition, current language models are precisely what was meant by AI and generally fall into that category of computer program. They aren’t broad / general AI, but definitely narrow / weak AI systems.

        I get that it’s trendy to shit on LLMs, often for good reason, but that should not mean we just redefine terms because some system doesn’t fit our idealized under-informed definition of a technical term.