Thread

1. rahidz · 1789909623 · focus · HN ↗

   Man I remember back when a psychic conned me by solving the Navier-Stokes problem.

   Also >July 4th, 2023

   1. Angostura · 1789910687 · focus · HN ↗

      But were you successfully conned into believing an AI had solved the Navier-Stokes problem?

      1. tescreal · 1789910873 · focus · HN ↗

         What is the consensus among experts?

         1. grey-area · 1789912868 · focus · HN ↗

            That OpenAI stole the discovery from them.

            1. daishi55 · 1789913730 · focus · HN ↗

               That is very much not the consensus of experts.

               1. pixl97 · 1789917162 · focus · HN ↗

                  It's kinda funny how hard the anti-ai people bias themselves and in the same sentence will say the AI people are irrational.

                  1. krupan · 1789918710 · focus · HN ↗

                     The point of this article we are all commenting on is that we are all irrational and we all would do well to keep that in mind and be more skeptical

                     1. daishi55 · 1789919885 · focus · HN ↗

                        The point for me is that all these people who were smirking at those of us who thought in 2023 that LLMs had the potential to do real intellectual work turned out to be completely wrong.

                        I’m a super skeptical guy. I was late to the ChatGPT party because it sounded silly. I didn’t even try it for a long time. As soon as I started giving it a chance, my attitudes started changing very quickly.

                        That’s why it’s so hard for me to understand people like the author or give them the benefit of the doubt. If I could see it as just some guy, why couldn’t they?

                        1. krupan · 1789924747 · focus · HN ↗

                           I agree that "don't use it for anything" might be too extreme a position to take, but I worry greatly that these proprietary opaque tools that are being provided by at best people with extreme conflicts of interest and at worst sociopaths need to be adopted with extreme care
                     2. pixl97 · 1789920309 · focus · HN ↗

                        Skepticism is a fine balance.

                        If you're not skeptical you invite idiocy to your bed to sleep with you.

                        If you're too skeptical you put yourself in a box of ignorance that puts you at a disadvantage.

                        Skepticism doesn't really work well without the dialectic. For dialectics to work well you need knowledge of your arguments and counter arguments.

                        The problem with most articles and online posts is we get "no no no" and "yes yes yes" and very few "well, maybe".

                        1. krupan · 1789924792 · focus · HN ↗

                           Absolutely true and the comments here are mostly in one of those two categories, sadly

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.