← Back to context

Comment by keeda

6 days ago

A lot of the doubters are basically saying: "If it's so great, show me proof." While that is usually the right stance, I think it is short-sighted in times of revolutionary change.

To be sure, you definitely should not blindly trust the people who have a stake in selling AI products. However, you probably should trust the people who have no stake in selling AI, but are using it to accelerate themselves. The problem is, these people are probably too busy building things to spare any time convincing you. And in fact, it is a competitive advantage for them if others don't figure it out.

Here's my take: Everyone needs to figure out how AI works for them. The thing with AI is that it is a technology that behaves like people. It has the speed, efficiency and scale of computers but the fallibility and quirks of humans. This is why it's so confusing to discuss, and why folks have such varying experiences. The right approach to working with AI is like working with people: understand what they're good at and where they are weak, and then work with them to achieve your goals.

This will require using it "in anger" on many non-trivial tasks over a significant period of time, which will take persistence and patience. Yes, the hype is so over-the-top that you might not want to invest your valuable time on it. But you owe it to yourself to ensure you can fully capitalize on the sea change that is happening.

If it helps, I (like the OP) have no stake in selling AI and I posted this comment about my experiences on the other thread about the AI coding -- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44163543 -- The upshot is, AI has enabled me to produce innovative (probably cutting edge) work in domains I had little prior background in. And I've not even used agents yet!

> Everyone needs to figure out how AI works for them.

That is the real takeaway.

I use LLM’s for dozens of things. It took time to find how model strengths best connect with mine.

People who only evaluate models for one purpose over short timespans are going to have a hard time.

It’s like models come from a different cognitive & communication culture. Eliminating that barrier takes more experimentation and experience than logic.

I think their creativity is also often a function of the prompters creativity.

The harder you (creatively) push them into a creative corner, the more genuinely creative they get.

Not unlike how a good teacher can get unexpected positive results from students when they are channeled and pushed.