[strange_quark]

I don't get why it's so hard for you and others in this comment section to understand why people hate AI so much because it's not just the theft and environmental destruction. A college professor, especially one at a liberal arts school, is obviously not going to like something that enables you to outsource your thinking and steals your agency. I think that's a perfectly valid viewpoint; maybe talk to someone without STEM-brain who lives outside of SF for once.

[simonw]

I've recently been amplifying this excellent piece about that by Nilay Patel https://www.theverge.com/podcast/917029/software-brain-ai-ba...

I don't need computer science professors to like LLMs, but I still want them to be able to poke at them with a stick without feeling like they are violating their principles regarding energy usage and unlicensed training data.

[strange_quark]

> I don't need computer science professors to like LLMs, but I still want them to be able to poke at them with a stick without feeling like they are violating their principles regarding energy usage and unlicensed training data.

Why? Language models are interesting from a technical perspective, but so are tons of areas of CS. There's nothing inherently virtuous about using an LLM.

[simonw]

I think LLMs are the most fascinating new piece of computer science to come along in at least the past decade.

The academic field of computer science pretty much started as an exploration into whether machines could be built that could understand human language.

The Turing test dates back to Turing!

[strange_quark]

> I think LLMs are the most fascinating new piece of computer science to come along in at least the past decade.

Agree to disagree.

> The academic field of computer science pretty much started as an exploration into whether machines could be built that could understand human language.

No? CS started as an offshoot of applied mathematics and physics. The study of formal logic, algorithms, digital circuits, etc. predates Turing by centuries. Hell, even the Turing machine predates the Turing test by a couple decades.

[tptacek]

Wait, really? Say more about the disagreement? That's interesting. Even LLM skeptics I've talked to are still shocked at how far transformers can get you.

[strange_quark]

I guess it depends how you define fascinating. I think there's certainly aspects of ML that I find fascinating, but I don't think that LLMs specifically are actually that interesting. In fairness, I'd be lying if I said that I wasn't surprised that you could get this far with the transformer. On the other hand, it's shouldn't be that surprising that if you can mobilize an Iraq war's level of money and a bunch of smart people to work on one specific thing, you can muscle basically anything into existence.

But back to the GP comment: I'm still not sure why a CS prof necessarily needs to be able to poke at LLMs at all. There are plenty of other areas of CS that are worth exploring. And if it's not possible to make a good LLM without violating your principles, well, then maybe they aren't such a worthwhile piece of technology.

[pickleRick243]

I don't see how "wordcel" brain is bigger on thinking and agency than "shape rotator" brain unless you have a very biased view of what each is.

Also, it really doesn't matter who does or doesn't hate AI. It's like the automobile- it's inevitable and society will adapt to its endemic use.