bluepeter

I remember being blown away by BERT and all its variations (BART etc) after the Transformers paper. For topic modeling and other semantic understanding of text, that was bee's knees. But certainly not replacing any humans.

> First, they came for the artists, and I did not speak out, because I was not an artist.

// actually FIRST they came for the programmers. and many of us were ultimately ULTIMATELY pretty tickled to get such a massive productivity boost. this anti-AI sentiment as seen here and in Jon Stewart's rant that all AI is good for is optimizing shopping carts or something... it's so upsetting see good folks buying into this and not realizing how much benefit it will bring. If anything, I've seen how much amazing power it has now given programmers such as myself... I can do what would take me years in an afternoon.

// Btw, can we retire the "first they came for the..." template, it's a little tired.

Loved it... love it even more now. So darn fast.

I've seen my entire profession vanish overnight due to AI... well, not vanish. But, yeah, software development is WAYYYY different. And I couldn't be happier. I think it's amazing. I see the productivity boost. Even if it means I can't add nearly as much value as I used to.

Sorry, but I don't get why mathematicians are so upset. Like, just accept the knowledge and insights and acceleration in your field! If it isn't "fit for human consumption" because an AI produced, okay... it soon will be explained ELI5 by even better models.

I mean, he still seems to underestimate what future models will be able to do. The various directions he wants to reward are also things future models will do far better than humans. I suspect we're better suited to pursuing math like we do pleasure reading... it's enjoyable, can be useful in various situations, but we're clear-eyed that we're not gonna advance the field... and that's okay and doesn't mean it's not still worthwhile.

it gets me all the time too lol

Worth remembering that Steve Jobs championed "iAds"... https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthof/2011/12/13/steve-jobs...

My bad on the origin of this. Still, we saw a recent rumor that they've solved another 100 inscrutable math problems. I'd say their N-S announcement did not result in positive publicity at all. In fact, quite the opposite, and may be the direct cause of the dozens of Fields medal winners penning their "slow AI" letter.

OpenAI solving all these math/etc problems (reportedly 100 coming) is both impressive and insanely unimpressive. Unimpressive because to me it sorta signals that OpenAI has nothing better to be working on than obscure mathematical curios?

Perhaps not 1:1, but, personally, I can read for much longer than I can write. And so I'd argue that this duration increase matches any deeper thought that comes with shorter writing bursts.

> Writing requires thinking, don't let an AI do the thinking for you.

Okay, but reading also requires substantial thinking. Moreover, we can say the same about, say, coding. And I am sure there are people who will say, yes, don't use AI to code. But I do, and the results are amazing, and I still think very deeply: in fact, I spend more time with AI coding (and thinking) than before as I do not get hamstrung on, how do I convert this Word doc to PDF in code again? I spend more time in higher order thinking. Same with when I read text written by an AI. I don't believe that writing is any more sacrosanct that coding. And reading and adjusting AI output requires substantial thinking.

Found this:

> Plus, Pro, Business, Enterprise, and Edu accounts will not have ads.

https://help.openai.com/en/articles/20001047-ads-in-chatgpt

AI doomerism makes me sad, especially when it keeps popping up even in HN and Reddit tech threads. I can't help but see even this post itself as a kind of AI doomerism. Here we have the greatest innovation I've seen in my career... It's such a game-changer for me personally, and I can't wait to see what happens. But the anti-data center and anti-AI voices are rising, rising. I know that over-regulation is a real risk that can stifle that innovation and all its benefits really fast. I can't help but see the parallels to the nuclear debate from decades ago. The difference now is that we already have millions (billions?) of people using AI, and yet we haven't had widespread disaster. That's not to say that it can't happen, but it feels like we are battling an invisible demon that never shows itself. At the same time, my 15 year old son coded 3 ROblox apps this summer... he said, this can't be coding. It sure is, I said, you are coding and revel in it because you're on the vanguard. He was so excited and so am I.