[m_ke]

It's the new underpaid employee that you're training to replace you.

People need to understand that we have the technology to train models to do anything that you can do on a computer, only thing that's missing is the data.

If you can record a human doing anything on a computer, we'll soon have a way to automate it

[xyzzy123]

Sure, but do you want abundance of software, or scarcity?

The price of having "star trek computers" is that people who work with computers have to adapt to the changes. Seems worth it?

[worldsayshi]

My only objection here is that technology wont save us unless we also have a voice in how it is used. I don't think personal adaptation is enough for that. We need to adapt our ways to engage with power.

[almostdeadguy]

Both abundance and scarcity can be bad. If you can't imagine a world where abundance of software is a very bad thing, I'd suggest you have a limited imagination?

[krackers]

Abundance of services before abundance of physical resources seems like the worst of both worlds.

[jimbokun]

It’s not worth it because we don’t have the Star Trek culture to go with it.

Given current political and business leadership across the world, we are headed to a dystopian hellscape and AI is speeding up the journey exponentially.

[agumonkey]

It's a strange economical morbid dependency. AI companies promises incredible things but AI agents cannot produce it themselves, they need to eat you slowly first.

[gtowey]

Perfect analogy for capitalism.

[xnx]

Exactly. If there's any opportunity around AI it goes to those who have big troves of custom data (Google Workspace, Office 365, Adobe, Salesforce, etc.) or consultants adding data capture/surveillance of workers (especially high paid ones like engineers, doctors, lawyers).

[mylifeandtimes]

> the new underpaid employee that you're training to replace you.

and who is also compiling a detailed log of your every action (and inaction) into a searchable data store -- which will certainly never, NEVER be used against you

[badgersnake]

I think we’re past the “if only we had more training data” myth now. There are pretty obviously far more fundamental issues with LLMs than that.

[m_ke]

i've been working in this field for a very long time, i promise you, if you can collect a dataset of a task you can train a model to repeat it.

the models do an amazing job interpolating and i actually think the lack of extrapolation is a feature that will allow us to have amazing tools and not as much risk of uncontrollable "AGI".

look at seedance 2.0, if a transformer can fit that, it can fit anything with enough data

[Gigachad]

Data clearly isn't the only issue. LLMs have been trained on orders of magnitude more data than any person has ever seen.

[polotics]

How much practice have you got on software development with agentic assistance. Which rough edges, surprising failure modes, unexpected strengths and weaknesses, have you already identified?

How much do you wish someone else had done your favorite SOTA LLM's RLHF?

[cesarvarela]

LLMs have a large quantity of chess data and still can't play for shit.

[nicowesterdale]

I wrote a, I hope, amusing breakdown of the structural reasons why off-the-shelf Large Language Models physically cannot "see" a chess board, and continue to make illegal moves, and teleport pieces as seen in Gotham Chess' latest videos.

https://www.nicowesterdale.com/blog/why-llms-cant-play-chess

[dwohnitmok]

Not anymore. This benchmark is for LLM chess ability: https://github.com/lightnesscaster/Chess-LLM-Benchmark?tab=r.... LLMs are graded according to FIDE rules so e.g. two illegal moves in a game leads to an immediate loss.

This benchmark doesn't have the latest models from the last two months, but Gemini 3 (with no tools) is already at 1750 - 1800 FIDE, which is approximately probably around 1900 - 2000 USCF (about USCF expert level). This is enough to beat almost everyone at your local chess club.

[iugtmkbdfil834]

Hm.. but do they need it.. at this point, we do have custom tools that beat humans. In a sense, all LLM need is a way to connect to that tool ( and the same is true is for counting and many other aspects ).

[menaerus]

Did you already forget about the AlphaZero?

[BeetleB]

Are you saying an LLM can't produce a chess engine that will easily beat you?