| Its not an AI hype. A hype is defined as something which gets oversold: "promote or publicize (a product or idea) intensively, often exaggerating its benefits." Just yesterday I visited a google cloud summit and one person from bosch told the audiance how they are now able to work with less external agencies like texting, graphicsdesigner and photographers for their materials. It already saves money, has real impacts and continues to progress. We are also don't know what ChatGPT 5 will bring, because they say this will do more reasoning than before, but we already are working (people/our socity) on solving this in different ways: From code which creates a unit test first and than the code, to different type of architectures. For me, 2024 was the LLM cost reduction year and the LLM gets a big context window year. AI doesn't need to be ready tomorrow, but its capabilities are already really good. And i know plenty of people around me who are a lot less interesting to talk to than any llm (from a human skill/knowledge point of view). llama 3 was also a big achievement 2024. Facebook shows that better data leads to better quality for smaller models. We haven't not only entered the AI ara but also the 'gather all the knowledge we can, quality check it and refine it because now we can actually do something with it' ara. We are in the feedbackloop knowledge ara. |
For me, 2024 was the LLM exposed as basically pure hype year.
There is no expert of any field I follow online where they're posting up results from AI tooling for any other reason than to show how awful it is. I consider myself an expert in software, and LLMs specifically have only caused me great pain.
Even the one situation where you describe someone describing the ability to work in an absolute vacuum sounds like a huge negative to me. The recent push for DEI policies were even ostensibly about the importance of people of diverse backgrounds and viewpoints working together.
The most important thing you're missing a perspective of scale on is the step you describe as "quality check it". On things I don't know, and have attempted to enlist an LLMs help on, in every case I have had to go back and just actually learn how something works, after time wasted struggling with subtle wrongness in the output.
At least I have the background expertise to do that, however, I have seen a Jr dev's mind get literally rotted by too much time in pure LLM land. Besides the cost of rewriting their code, the company was now the proud owner of a young dev with a mind filled with nonsense.
How do you even weigh the cost of fixing a corrupted human mind?