‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

The LLMentalist Effect (2023)

235 points · 309 comments · jalev

  1. bonoboTP · · focus · HN ↗
    I don't care if it's "intelligent", I don't care if it "has a mind". I don't care if it is "really reasoning", I don't care if it "understands". I don't care if it is "sentient" or "conscious".

    None of this matters for the practical outcome.

    You'd think that this has been understood over the last 4 years, but apparently it keeps circling back to this.

    [Edit: I see that it was written back in 2023. Then (2023) should be added in the submission title]

    If it generates functional output that works, then it works. And it works. It's not a psychic's con when it outputs Lean-verified proofs. It isn't a con when it can find and exploit zero-days.

    The OP is still in the "denial" phase. Most I see are already in "anger" (a blurry fury against everything AI-shaped, from vague reasons piling on all "bad stuff" political reasons they already hated before) or "bargaining" (mathematicians scrambling to come up with a new definition of their job and retcon that it was always the main part anyway). A few are already in "depression" and feel like spectators on the Titanic, and the tiniest sliver is at "acceptance" with some kind of well-informed plan for their future.

    1. _superposition_ · · focus · HN ↗
      I think you are majorly overstating OP that ai "didn't work". In fact I agree with the post on almost all aspects and I'd be the last to tell you ai doesn't work. It absolutely does but with a caveat... It's still a tool. And better expertise in the problem domain, along with a better harness used for verifiable outputs will get you better results.

      I think the posts mental model of stastically likely prompt completions is spot on.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.