Comment by datsci_est_2015
2 hours ago
> It can produce a working machine that does the job
Until it doesn’t, and then you’re too stupid to understand why not. Was it that your prompt wasn’t good enough? Does the model not have enough context? Is it even possible for your request to be satisfied?
> What does human stupidity have to do with this?
You answered this yourself:
> but you won't be able to understand it.
And:
> I'm saying ask the AI something beyond your intellectual capabilities. Or ask it something beyond your intrinsic knowledge base.
What’s the limit to this? “Claude build me a nuclear fusion reactor.” Surely we can agree that there’s a limit or we’d already be living in some post-scarcity utopia. So what’s the limit?
I’m suggesting a limit: human stupidity is limitless while compute is finite. We can use the word “ignorance” if the word “stupid” is too inflammatory.
> Until it doesn’t, and then you’re too stupid to understand why not. Was it that your prompt wasn’t good enough? Does the model not have enough context? Is it even possible for your request to be satisfied?
You’re unable to comprehend the topic of the conversation.
We’re talking about querying the model with prompts and asking for solutions beyond your intelligence. You’re talking about flawed prompts.
> You answered this yourself
You’re rude af. Not understanding something is not intrinsically bad.
In fact you use things you don’t understand on a daily fucking basis. Your iPhone, your car, your computer. All of these things have aspects of it beyond your intellectual capability to fully grasp or comprehend and yet you use it. Sometimes these people who make these things produce faulty products and you ask for a refund and are more careful in the future about what you trust, sometimes the product is exemplary.
Relying on an LLM to do something for you is much of the same.
Get it? Probably not. What are you going to do? Call me stupid again because you have nothing substantial to say? lol.
Edit: you edited your response which is uncharitable. But whatever I’ll respond to your new statements below.
> What’s the limit to this? “Claude build me a nuclear fusion reactor.” Surely we can agree that there’s a limit or we’d already be living in some post-scarcity utopia. So what’s the limit?
I agree. But this is not the topic of conversation. I’m talking about querying LLM to do something beyond your ability. This is something you can do and also stay well within the obvious limit you’re implying here.
> I’m suggesting a limit: human stupidity is limitless while compute is finite. We can use the word “ignorance” if the word “stupid” is too inflammatory.
You don’t need to suggest a limit. It’s obvious ai can’t build a nuclear reactor. Nobody needs to be told this.
A clever quote doesn’t prove shit. Ok so human stupidity is limitless. Computer is also finite. I agree.
How the fuck does the above two facts which I agree with have anything to do with me asking the LLM to make something I have no knowledge about? “Hey LLM write an emulator for this Zelda n64 game.”
The prompt is well within the “limit” of what an LLM can do. Compute is still limited. And human stupidity is still boundless. Nothing has changed. Why? Because someone is ignorant and unaware they are prancing off topic onto orthogonal concepts.
I’m using the word “you” in the generic, impersonal way, like the word “man” in German.
But in your argument we are all essentially idiots compared to AI, and should essentially embrace that, dunno why you take offense to it. I essentially agree. Where I disagree is how far we can make it without human intelligence in the loop because of finite compute power.