8 ms·

I agree that "coding" isn't solved but LLMs needing a harness is not necessarily a huge hit on AI As for valuation, it's all a grift, always has been for anyth

I agree that "coding" isn't solved but LLMs needing a harness is not necessarily a huge hit on AI As for valuation, it's all a grift, always has been for anything hip in tech. SpaceX should've been in the $500b range and they have an actual rocket and working satellite constellations

oblio 2mo ago
LLMs needing harnesses is a hit on AI because it means LLMs can't be extended a lot (or indefinitely as AI boosters hope). We're back to (enhanced) expert systems from the 80s and nobody is excited about those. And regarding SpaceX, SpaceX even without xAI didn't make a ton of money and it's business initiatives are super long horizon things. Moon bases won't be profitable for at least 10 years and Mars bases probably for 20+. Also, even though they are behind, competition is moving. China caught their first rocket yesterday (and we know they can move fast), BlueOrigin is behind but they have the money to keep going. The EU and India will keep investing and developing as rockets are a core concern for both, at some point they will have reusable rockets. These huge valuations for SpaceX are predicated on winner takes all mechanics, which are mostly software based. Many markets don't work like that since the cost to get another unit of revenue increases linearly with that unit. Not like software where extra copies and customers are basically free.
- handoflixue 2mo ago
  Coders needing compilers is a hit on coding because it means coding can't be extended a lot? I'm just not following the logic at all. We build vastly more ambitious software today than we did in the 80s
  - oblio 2mo ago
    That's an intentionally obtuse comment. Compilers are widely available as open source software not coming from companies that need to justify a $1tn valuation ASAP for their development of LLMs. Also the LLM = compiler comparison is generally just ridiculous. Their complexity, both internal and in usage for coding are multiple orders of magnitude apart.
    - handoflixue 2mo ago
      Oh yeah, nothing complex about a compiler, that only takes 4 years of college to understand. That's soooo much simpler than typing "make me a Tetris clone". Literally no one has 4 years of experience with LLMs, because they haven't existed for four years. Today's experts are tomorrow's college graduates.
      - fragmede 2mo ago
        ChatGPT was released November 30, 2022. GPT-2, before that. So we're right around 4 years.
        handoflixue 2mo ago
        Thus why no one has 4 years of experience yet, yeah.
      - deleted 2mo ago
        [deleted]

oblio 2mo ago

LLMs needing harnesses is a hit on AI because it means LLMs can't be extended a lot (or indefinitely as AI boosters hope). We're back to (enhanced) expert systems from the 80s and nobody is excited about those. And regarding SpaceX, SpaceX even without xAI didn't make a ton of money and it's business initiatives are super long horizon things. Moon bases won't be profitable for at least 10 years and Mars bases probably for 20+. Also, even though they are behind, competition is moving. China caught their first rocket yesterday (and we know they can move fast), BlueOrigin is behind but they have the money to keep going. The EU and India will keep investing and developing as rockets are a core concern for both, at some point they will have reusable rockets. These huge valuations for SpaceX are predicated on winner takes all mechanics, which are mostly software based. Many markets don't work like that since the cost to get another unit of revenue increases linearly with that unit. Not like software where extra copies and customers are basically free.

handoflixue 2mo ago
Coders needing compilers is a hit on coding because it means coding can't be extended a lot? I'm just not following the logic at all. We build vastly more ambitious software today than we did in the 80s
- oblio 2mo ago
  That's an intentionally obtuse comment. Compilers are widely available as open source software not coming from companies that need to justify a $1tn valuation ASAP for their development of LLMs. Also the LLM = compiler comparison is generally just ridiculous. Their complexity, both internal and in usage for coding are multiple orders of magnitude apart.
  - handoflixue 2mo ago
    Oh yeah, nothing complex about a compiler, that only takes 4 years of college to understand. That's soooo much simpler than typing "make me a Tetris clone". Literally no one has 4 years of experience with LLMs, because they haven't existed for four years. Today's experts are tomorrow's college graduates.
    - fragmede 2mo ago
      ChatGPT was released November 30, 2022. GPT-2, before that. So we're right around 4 years.
      - handoflixue 2mo ago
        Thus why no one has 4 years of experience yet, yeah.
    - deleted 2mo ago
      [deleted]