News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Google Antigravity by CamperBob2 on Tuesday November 18, 2025 @02:59PM (#45971231)
- don't learn from what you tell them

We'll fix that, eventually.

- don't have career growth that you can feel good about having contributed to

Humans are on the verge of building machines that are smarter than we are. I feel pretty goddamned awesome about that. It's what we're supposed to be doing.

- don't have a genuine interest in accomplishment or team goals

Easy to train for, if it turns out to be necessary. I'd always assumed that a competitive drive would be necessary in order to achieve or at least simulate human-level intelligence, but things don't seem to be playing out that way.

- have no past and no future. When you change companies, they won't recognize you in the hall.

Or on the picket line.

- no ownership over results. If they make a mistake, they won't suffer.

Good deal. Less human suffering is usually worth striving for.

Re:Google Antigravity by recursive on Tuesday November 18, 2025 @04:10PM (#45972125)
> Humans are on the verge of building machines that are smarter than we are. I feel pretty goddamned awesome about that. It's what we're supposed to be doing.

It's also the premise of The Matrix. I feel pretty goddamned uneasy about that.

Re:Google Antigravity by CamperBob2 on Tuesday November 18, 2025 @06:48PM (#45973842)
(Shrug) There are other sources of inspiration besides dystopic sci-fi movies. There's the Biblical story of the Tower of Babel, for instance. Better not work on language translation, which after all is how the whole LLM thing got started.
Re:Google Antigravity by recursive on Tuesday November 18, 2025 @07:23PM (#45974188)
Sometimes fiction went in the wrong direction. Sometimes it didn't go far enough.

In any case, the matrix wasn't my inspiration here, but it is a pithy way to describe the concept. It's hard to imagine how humans maintain relevancy if we really do manage to invent something smarter than us. It could be that my imagination is limited though. I've been accused of that before.

Re:Google Antigravity by noduerme on Tuesday November 18, 2025 @03:09PM (#45971361)
Replace suffering with caring and have your AI write that again.
Re:Google Antigravity by CamperBob2 on Tuesday November 18, 2025 @06:51PM (#45973873)
Why would I do a goofy thing like that?
Re:Google Antigravity by noduerme on Wednesday November 19, 2025 @10:16PM (#45988489)
>>Humans are on the verge of building machines that are smarter than we are. I feel pretty goddamned awesome about that. It's what we're supposed to be doing.

Have you ever spent any time around children? How about people who think they're accomplishing a great mission by releasing truly noxious ones on the world?

You just dismissed the entire notion of accountability as an unnecessary form of suffering, which is right up there with the most nihilistic ideas ever said by, idk, Dostoevsky's underground man or Raskolnikov.

Don't waste your life on being the Joker.

Re:Google Antigravity by lowsong on Tuesday November 18, 2025 @05:56PM (#45973402)
> We'll fix that, eventually.

> Humans are on the verge of building machines that are smarter than we are.

You're not describing a system that exists. You're describing a system that might exist in some sci-fi fantasy future. You might as well be saying "there's no point learning to code because soon the rapture will come".

Re:Google Antigravity by CamperBob2 on Tuesday November 18, 2025 @06:47PM (#45973831)
That particular future exists now, it's just not evenly distributed. Gemini 2.5 Pro Thinking is already as good at programming as I am. Architecture, probably not, but give it time. It's far better at math than I am, and at least as good at writing.
Re:Google Antigravity by aDyslecticCrow on Wednesday November 19, 2025 @07:14AM (#45978646)
Computers beat us in maths decades ago, yet LLMs are not able to beat a calculator half of the time. The maths benchmarks that companies so proudly show off are still the realm of a traditional symbolic solvers. You claiming much success in asking LLMS for math makes me question if you have actually asked an LLM about maths.

Most AI experts not heavily invested in the stocks of inflated tech companies seem to agree that current architectures cannot reach AGI. It's a sci-fi dream, but hyping it is real profitable. We can destroy ourselves plenty with the tech we already have, but it won't be a robot revolution that does it.

Re:Google Antigravity by CamperBob2 on Wednesday November 19, 2025 @11:20AM (#45981413)
The maths benchmarks that companies so proudly show off are still the realm of a traditional symbolic solvers. You claiming much success in asking LLMS for math makes me question if you have actually asked an LLM about maths.

What I really need to ask an LLM for is a pointer to a forum that doesn't cultivate proud exhibitions of ignorance, Luddism, and general stupidity at the level exhibited by commenters in this entire HN story, and in this subthread in particular.

We already had one Reddit, we didn't need two.

Re:Google Antigravity by apical_dendrite on Tuesday November 18, 2025 @10:54PM (#45975684)
> It's what we're supposed to be doing.

Why?

Re:Google Antigravity by wartywhoa23 on Wednesday November 19, 2025 @06:06AM (#45978176)
Because venture capital managers say so.