If you get off the internet you'd not even realise these tools exists though. And for the statement that all jobs will be modelled to be true, it'd have to be impacting the real world.
Is it even possible to "get off the internet" without also leaving civilisation in general at this point?
> it'd have to be impacting the real world
By writing business plans? Getting lawyers punished because they didn't realise that "passes bar exam" isn't the same as "can be relied on for citations"? By defrauding people with synthesised conversations using stolen voices? By automating and personalising propaganda?
Or does it only count when it's guiding a robot that's not merely a tech demo?
I’ll be worried about jobs being removed entirely by LLMs when I see something outside of the tech bubble genuinely having been removed by one - has there been any real cases of this? It seems like hyperbole. Most people in the world don’t even know this exists. Comparing it to the internet is insane, based off of its status as a highly advanced auto complete.
Sure, but think about all of the jobs that won't exist because this studio isn't being expanded, well beyond just whatever shows stop being produced. Construction, manufacturing, etc.
Edit: Also this doesn't mean less medea, just less actual humans getting paid to make medea or work adjacent jobs
Maybe it's time to construct some (high[er] density) housing where people want to live? No? Okay, then maybe next decade ... but then let's construct transport for them so they can get to work, how about some new subway lines? Ah, okay, not that either.
Then I guess the only thing remains to construct is all the factories that will be built as companies decouple from China.
> Comparing it to the internet is insane, based off of its status as a highly advanced auto complete.
(1) I was quoting you.
(2) Don't you get some cognitive dissonance dismissing it in those terms, at this point?
"Fancy auto complete" was valid for half the models before InstructGPT, as that's all the early models were even trying to be… but now? The phrase doesn't fit so well when it's multimodal and can describe what it's seeing or hearing and create new images and respond with speech, all as a single unified model, any more than dismissing a bee brain as "just chemistry" or a human as "just an animal".
Sure and there’s endless AI generated blog spam from “journalists” saying LLMs are amazing and they’re going to replace our jobs etc… but get away from the tech bubble and you’ll see we’re so far away from that. Full self driving when? Autonomous house keepers when? Even self checkout still has to have human help most of the time and didn’t reduce jobs much. Call me a skeptic but HN is way too optimistic about this stuff.
Replacing all jobs except LLM developers? I’ll tell my hairdresser
Right, that entire internet think was complete hype, didn't go anywhere. BTW, can you fax me the menu for today?
And that motorized auto transport, it never went anywhere, it required roads. I mean, who would ever think we'd cover a huge portion of our land in these straight lines. Now, don't mind me, I'm going to go saddle up the horse and hope I don't catch dysentery on the way into town.
I don't think anybody's denying that revolutions happen. It's just that the number of technologies that actually turned out to be revolutionary are dwarfed by the number of things that looked revolutionary and then weren't. Remember when every television was definitely going to be using glasses-free 3D? People have actually built flying cars and robot butlers, yet the Jetsons is still largely wishful thinking. The Kinect actually shipped, yet today we play games mostly with handheld controllers. AI probably has at least some substance, but there's a non-zero amount of hype too. I don't think either extreme of outcome is a foregone conclusion.
Capabilities aren't the problem, cultural adoption is. Just yesterday I talked to someone who still googles solutions to their Excel table woes. Didn't they know of Copilot?
Maybe they didn't know, maybe none of their colleagues used it, their company didn't pay for it, or maybe all they need is an Excel update.
But I am confident that using Copilot would be faster than clicking through the sludge that are Microsoft Office help pages (third party or not.)
So I think it is correct to fear capabilities, even if the real world impace is still missing. When you invent an airplane, there won't be an airstrip to land on yet. Is it useless, won't it change anything?
> it'd have to be impacting the real world
By writing business plans? Getting lawyers punished because they didn't realise that "passes bar exam" isn't the same as "can be relied on for citations"? By defrauding people with synthesised conversations using stolen voices? By automating and personalising propaganda?
Or does it only count when it's guiding a robot that's not merely a tech demo?