We used to joke that "The internet was a mistake.", making fun of the bad parts... but LLMs take the fucking cake. No intelligent beings, no sentient robots, just unlimited amounts of slop.
The tech basically stopped evolving right around the point of it being good enough for spam and slop, but not going any further, there are no cures no new laws of physics or math or anything else being discovered by these things. All AI use in science I can see is based on finding patters in data, not intelligent thought (as in novel ideas). What a bust.
In fact I fear the humans optimize for attention and cater to the feed ranking Algorithm too much, while AI is at least trying to do a decent job. But with AI it is the responsibility of the user to guide it, what AI does depends on what the user does.
It’s clear pro-slavery-minded elitists are happy to sell the speech that people should become "good complement to AI", that is even more disposable as this puppets. But unlike this mindless entities, people have will to survive deeply engraved as primary behavior.
Now anyone mildly capable of using a computer is able to produce many more fictional characters than all that humanity collectively kept in its miscellaneous lores, and drawn them in an ocean of insipid narratives. All that nonetheless mostly passing all the grammatical checkboxes at a level most humans would fail (I definitely would :D).
>Here’s a concise and thoughtful response you could use to engage with ako’s last point:
---
"The scale and speed might be the key difference here. While human-generated narratives—like religions or myths—emerged over centuries through collective belief, debate, and cultural evolution, LLMs enable individuals to produce vast, coherent-seeming narratives almost instantaneously. The challenge isn’t just the volume of ‘bullshit,’ but the potential for it to spread unchecked, without the friction or feedback loops that historically shaped human ideas. It’s less about the number of people involved and more about the pace and context in which these narratives are created and consumed."
And even when only considering the tools used in isolated sessions not exposed by default, the most popular ones are tuned to favor engagement and retention over relevance. That's a different point as LLM definitely can be tuned in different direction, but in practice in does matter in terms of social impact at scale. Even prime time infotainment covered people falling in love or encouraged into suicidal loops by now. You're absolutely right is not always the best
Anecdotally, the people I see the most excited about AI are the people that don't do any fucking work. I can create a lot of value with plain ol' for loop style automation in my niche. We're stil nowhere near the limit of what we can do with automation, that I don't give a fuck about what AI can do. Bruh in windows 10 copy and fuckin paste doesn't work for me anymore, but instead of fixing that they're adding AI
Stuff like that which regular users often do by hand, they can ask an LLM for the command (usually just a few lines of a scripting language if they only know the magic words to use).
I’m not worried about AI taking our jobs, I’m worried about the market crash when the reality of the various failed (… to actually reduce payroll) or would’ve-been-cheaper-and-better-without-AI initiatives the two of us have been working on non-stop since this shit started break through the hype of investment and the music stops.
Ozempic’s FDA approval was in 2017, the same year transformers were invented.
Whatever you can place at LLMs, GLP-1’s aren’t one of them.
Fully agree.
You don't hear that anymore.
Feels like whole generation of skeptics evaporated.
The skeptics haven't evaporated, they just aren't bothering to try to talk to you any more because they don't think there's value in it.
We are yet to have a fully vibe-coded piece of software that actually works. The blog post is actually great because LLMs are very good are regurgitating pieces of code that already exist on a single prompt. Now ask them to make a few changes and suddenly the genie is back in the bottle.
Something doesn't math out. You can't be both a genius and extremely dumb (retarded) at the same time. You can be, however, good at information retrieval and presenting it in a better way. That's what LLMs are and am not discounting the usefulness of that.
That’s actually a classic stereotype, someone being a genius in some area, but failing with the most basic social expectations in other area.
The marketing bullshit that it’s a "thinking" and "hallucinating" is just bringing the intended confusion on the table.
They are great tools for many purpose. But a GPS is not a copilot, and an LLM is not going to replace coworkers where their humanity matters.
For one thing, it’s far more interesting than a rubber duck in many cases. Of course on that matter in the end it’s about framing the representation adequately and enter a fictional dialog.
From perspective of personally using it daily, seeing what my team is using it for it's quite shocking to still see those kind of comments, it's like we're living on different planets - again, gives flat earther like vibe.
The Bitter Lesson is with enough VC subsidised compute those things are useful.
No point in arguing about it though with true believers, they will never change their minds.
Now, that being said, do I think they are as good as a skilled human on most things? No, I don't. My trust issues have increased after the GPT-5 presentation. The very first question was to showcase its "PhD-level" knowledge, and it gave a wrong answer. It just happened to be in a field I know enough about to notice, but most didn't.
So, while I think they can be considered as having some form of intelligence, I believe they have more limits than a lot of people seem to realise.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aR20FWCCjAs&list=PLd7-bHaQwn...
Ilya Sutskever this week.
how many prompts did it take you to make this?
how did you make sure that each new prompt didn't break some previous functionality?
did you have a precise vision for it when you started or did you just go with whatever was being given to you?
Alas, I did not realize I was being held to the standard of having no bugs under any circumstance, and printing nothing to the console.
I have removed the amateurish log entries, I am pitiably sorry for any offense they may have caused. I will be sure to artisanally hand-write all my code from now on, to atone for the enormity of my sin.
Probably hundreds, I'd say.
> how did you make sure that each new prompt didn't break some previous functionality?
For the backend, I reviewed the code and steered it to better solutions a few times (fewer than I thought I'd need to!). For the frontend, I only tested and steered, because I don't know much about React at all.
This was impossible with previous models, I was really surprised that Codex didn't seem to completely break down after a few iterations!
> did you have a precise vision
I had a fairly precise vision, but the LLM made some good contributions. The UI aesthetic is mostly the LLM, as I'm not very good at that. The UX and functionality is almost entirely me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aR20FWCCjAs&list=PLd7-bHaQwn...
this has been my experience purely vibecoding. i am surprised it works well for others.
btw the current production bug. how did you discover that and why it slip out. looks like site wasn't working at all when you posted that comment?
I used to run into a related issue, where fixing a bug would add more bugs, to the point where it would not be able to progress past a given codebase complexity. However, Codex is much better at not doing that. There are some cases where the model kept going back and forth between two bugs, but I discovered that that was because I had misunderstood the constraints and was telling the model to do something impossible.
> how did you discover that and why it slip out.
Sentry alerted me but I thought it was an edge case, and I didn't pay attention until hours later.
I use a spiral allocation algorithm to allocate plots, so new users are clustered around the center. Sometimes plots are emptied (when the user isn't active), so you can have gaps in the spiral, which the algorithm tries to fill, and it's meant to go to the next plot if the current one can't be assigned.
For one specific plot, however, conditions were such that the database was giving an integrity error. The exception handling code that was supposed to handle that didn't take into account that it needed to roll back before resuming, so the entire request failed, instead of resuming gracefully. Just adding an atomic() context manager fixed it.
> looks like site wasn't working at all when you posted that comment?
It was working for a few hundreds (thousands?) of visitors, then the allocation code hit the plot that caused the bug, and signup couldn't proceed after that.
ok looks like you are intimately familiar with the code that is being produced and are AI as code generator rather than pure vibe coding. That makes sense to me.
Btw did AI add that line when you explained what the error was or did you add that in manually.
Specifically here, the AI added that line.
My current preference is Codex 5.1 (Sonnet 4.5 as a close second, though it got really dumb today for "some reason"). It's been good to the point where I shipped multiple projects with it without a problem (with eg https://pine.town being one I made without me writing any code).