[jsbisviewtiful]

> Stop insulting us and show some f*king proof, or go back to playing with LLMs until you can make them do the things you claim they can do.

Everything revolving around these LLMs so far as been tech hype culture and similar "think of the future" vibes. IMO we never see proof of this because right now it simply doesn't exist.

[tim333]

>Everything revolving around these LLMs so far as been tech hype culture...

compare with a headline from today:

>OpenAI’s ChatGPT to hit 700 million weekly users, up 4x from last year

I don't think there was much that hype when ChatGPT launched. Just an awful lot of people using it because it's kind of cool.

The critics seem to do a certain amount of goal post moving, like saying it's doing well by having unprecedented user growth is met by - f*king prove LLMs can indeed produce wholly novel research. Is anyone actually claiming they produce wholly novel research?

There is a similar effect with the featured blog post where the guy makes some perfectly reasonable arguments why he doesn't really like LLMs and doesn't want to work on them and then instead of titling it "Why I hate LLMs" goes with "Why I hate AI." But there's some quite cool stuff in non LLM AI like AlphaFold and trying to cure diseases. If you are talking about LLMs why not put LLM in the title?

[jsbisviewtiful]

> Is anyone actually claiming they produce wholly novel research?

I would argue companies performing layoffs because they think LLMs can do the work of a human is practically the same thing. There was even another article posted here today saying a bunch of companies are hiring humans again to fix the terrible work LLMs are doing, so it's fair to assume C-level jerks do think LLMs can produce something to the level of novel research and are finding out LLMs can't.