So, according to this, we should be using LLMs for recommendations of materials we need, but we shouldn't trust LLMs when they publish a list of materials we might need. Got it.
Right, this is what astonishes me about the constant rhetoric/hyperbole about how this is going to impact "all the jobs" and make everyone wildly more productive than ever before. It's a fabulous tool in a limited number of areas, and it's otherwise only handy here and there. But just because it's a fabulous tool for the coding that is so prevalent among HN users does not mean that it's a fabulous tool for everything.
A hammer is fantastic for driving nails, but it's not really all that good at washing a dog.
Mechanic, welder, builder, farmer, logger, millwright, trucker, heavy equipment operator... I could go on. Literally the entire economy in the area I live is completely impenetrable to tech, let alone AI. None of it is worth a shit to any business here.
These are all jobs the silly con valley idiots claim continuously to be automating away, but it's all just fuckin lies.
The extent of tech's penetration into this economy is internet ads on facebook and streaming services. Nothing to do with actual work.
Idk, sounds to me like you're in an isolated bubble and when change comes it'll hit HARD. Or you can become Amish and try to make things work for yourself. Every single one of those trades has companies doing much better because they've adopted technology, even a spreadsheet for paying taxes and tracking hours.
Sounds to me like you're bitter and not trusted with business operations for any of those companies.
No. In fact, the area I live is representative of the vast majority of the United States. Most of America is rural, by a huge margin.
> when change comes
No. You mean if change comes. If you're going to say the change you envision will come you must tell me how you're going to do it. Otherwise you're full of shit.
> Every single one of those trades has companies doing much better because they've adopted technology, even a spreadsheet for paying taxes and tracking hours.
Sure, that might be true. And it doesn't matter at all, because the ones here are doing just fine. To incentivize them to use your whiz bang techno doodad you need to do better than "some other guy somewhere else likes it". You need to show how it'll transform their lives for the better. Folks don't scare easily.
Yes, land area. We don't import anything from outer space. Everything we have, ultimately, comes from the land. If you want to build a house you get wood from home depot or menard's or whatever that was logged, milled in, and transported from a rural area. If you want to eat
food you go to the store and buy eggs, meat, milk, or vegetables that were grown in and transported from a rural area. Literally everything that makes life possible comes from these areas, and all of it runs on good old fashioned human labor.
You're not replacing any of that anytime soon with a LLM chatbot. Stop pretending.
This is conflating the benefits found within those areas with the ability of AI to actually deliver those things effectively across every single profession. Improving something by 2% vs. revolutionizing an entire industry are wholly different propositions. Maslow's hammer would like a word.
We do most of our communicating via phones on platforms that encourage flip, nuance-free takes, are hotbeds of disinformation, and so on. Nothing about the environments we exist in foster positive, meaningful communication that collectively benefits us. Everything we used is designed to divide.
Our inability to collectively get along ramped up exponentially as smartphones took off. Phones, and the platforms within that people have become dependent upon, are the root.
Edit: Instead of getting to know people at a deep level, understanding what shapes their core views and how they view the world, and constructively communicating with them to shape their worldview over time for the better, we prefer to yell and scream at each other in 140 characters for the sake of upvotes.
Real change and progress takes time and effort, but for some reason we're collectively deluded into thinking that it'll happen via upvotes in 45 seconds and without ever having looked one another in the eye.
Media illiteracy coupled with the sweet, sweet comfort of a screen. People love screens. Just look at how much awe young children (I say this as a parent of two littles) have when they first see a TV. Now look at how much we all love to look at screens of any kind.
We're absolutely fascinated by them. Gobsmacked.
And many people blindly believe what they see on their screens because they don't know any better. They trust the article they read without thinking too deeply about it or looking for alternative perspectives. They gobble up the reel they just watched and are irate about whatever it told them to be irate about. But this isn't anything new, just look at how easily grandma and grandpa gobbled up whatever Fox News fed them in 1998, or what heavily edited images designed to manipulate their thoughts and opinions they were exposed to in the 70s, the 80s when they turned the television on.
Screens have always, and will always, be used to manipulate people, and that's been incredibly amplified over the past 15-20 years.
Yet if you take the screen away and spend time connecting with people on a deeper level, really spend time getting to know them, life feels a hell of a lot different than what the screens show you. Understanding one another is a hell of a lot easier. Everyone can see exactly the same thing as the other person - the analog, meatspace world around them that isn't being manipulated and twisted in an effort to get them to think a certain way.
I also raised two children. My eldest is 18 and only now has a phone. When your children are adults you may no longer feel that phones, or screens, are the root cause. But, the whole world will have changed by then, so time will tell.
> Yet if you take the screen away and spend time connecting with people on a deeper level, really spend time getting to know them, life feels a hell of a lot different than what the screens show you.
I am not disagreeing with you here. My point is that the reason society is divided is not fundamentally because of phones or screens and removing them does not magically remove our ideological differences.
It doesn't remove our ideological differences, no. Nor should it. What it does is make us more likely to understand and communicate better with one another. That's the first step towards getting along and finding a path forward together in spite of our differences.
Differences of opinion are okay, but it's harder to get along when our lives are lived in spaces that silo us off and encourage distrust and anger. Screens do that to us, meatspace doesn't.
"It's the screens" feels too broad, it's not obvious that loving screen time is inherently bad. I do buy that the way news is now presented,and the insidiousness of social media algorithms is worth tackling.
But there are plenty of places in the world that don't seem quite as negatively affected to me, and even where screens are not the main culprit behind government/corporate manipulation and control.
You're never going to get people to stop using social media, but maybe it ought to be possible to regulate better.
I'm saying When we remove their phone, they do not have any sense of loss (unhappiness). If that's true then the simpler system of no phone is preferable to the complexity of having one.
If the phone was adding something (something unique/irreplaceable) then we'd expect to see some negative outcome once it's removed.
So, they screamed for 30 minutes. They're kids. I'm not gonna give my 4 or 6 year-old something that's gonna take a hatchet to their attention span just because they're doing a thing that's completely normal for that age.
That drive fucking sucks ass, don't get me wrong, but oh well, that's part of life - the kid has to learn that sometimes shit's not gonna go their way and they have to figure out how to get over it. I'll be damned if I'm gonna teach them that the way they can calm themselves down and regulate their emotions is by the sweet, sweet blue hue of a tablet.
We're a two working parent household and we keep screen time limited to a short amount of TV time. We'll expose them to screens more and more so that we can properly educate them over time, sure. But man, I don't get the whole, "even a two working parent household barely has time for anything and is stressful," bit because - yeah, that's exactly what parenting is.
Parenting is hard. It's exhausting. If you don't have a village, the onus is on you to do it right. That's what we've signed up for, is giving our all to our kids until they're out on their own. That's what we're supposed to do. It's not supposed to be easy, it's a constant stress the likes of which you will never know until you're in it. But we're here, so let's do the hard work and do it right. We owe it to them.
Edit: You're right, we need time and space and the ability to make good choices, but neither of those should come at the expense of my kids.
I can't imagine having to raise kids with both parents working. Good on you and your partner for holding the line on screen time in spite of the difficulty.
> That drive fucking sucks ass, don't get me wrong, but oh well, that's part of life
Such a great attitude. Wish everyone saw it this way. I've tanked a few car rides like this but I'll do it a hundred more times before I throw a pacifier at my kids.
>The reality is that majority of kids have always been allowed some form of screen time and todays screentime is going to at least be more interactive than yesterdays screentime.
I say this as a parent - hogwash. Fred Rogers looked into children's souls and spoke to them deeply at a nice comfortable pace and kids felt that, whereas today's modern screens utterly eviscerate their attention spans.
> I say this as a parent - hogwash. Fred Rogers looked into children's souls and spoke to them deeply at a nice comfortable pace and kids felt that, whereas today's modern screens utterly eviscerate their attention spans.
I turned on Mr. Rogers Neighborhood for the first time for my son a few days ago. After a few minutes I asked how the show felt. "Relaxing".
We sat down and watched the Music episode together for 20 or so minutes.
Parents can choose what their kids watch and listen to. Ignore the feed.
>One does not need to be a part of the enshitiffication of the internet.
Likewise, what with your shot-from-the-hip response that lambastes OP in a non-constructive way, the very kind of unhelpful "dialogue" that is all too common on the Internet these days.
Perhaps someone is genuinely ignorant and it could've behooved you to have kindly offered suggestions as to which of the "thousands decent science fiction and literature sites out there" your strongly opinionated, holier than thou self finds most valuable? Seems like a better place to start than whatever... this is.
I find it "non-constructive" when someone tells me I can't speak English properly and alleges I am a paid agent of Russia.
On the issue above... I mean, FFS, Gibson is a well known writer and has been for what feels like at least forty years. Not one of my favourites admittedly, but well known. We could find something else on him than yet another bloody Wikipedia link.
In other words, business as usual.
reply