[kusokurae]

The community portion that unironically think AI is good enough now, are mostly managers and non/semi-technical people, and engineers who do not engage in critical or complex problems. HN has always been too much of the velocity-alignment-synergy class of professional talkers; it's just so much more obvious now that they feel emboldened in false confidence.

[Eldt]

I've been paying attention to that line of division and came to the same conclusion. We're seeing the "tiers" diverge as AI becomes more capable. As the saying goes, you don't know what you don't know.

[Antibabelic]

No hackers on Hacker News? Oh my oh my

[enraged_camel]

Ah yes, the good old No True Scotsman fallacy, where we smugly proclaim that anyone who thinks AI is good now must be working on unimportant and easy things.

[kusokurae]

Ah yes, the (please copy & paste this message into an LLM to get it to generate a novel response in these parentheses)

[jodrellblank]

My comment from 3 years ago still something I agree with https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34925145

[vehemenz]

There's some of that, but more often it's developers whose arguments are a year behind the frontier models or, just as common, they're dramatically overstating their abilities.

It's an inherent tension that every discipline has to wrestle with. The most experienced developers are in the best position to evaluate where LLMs are, but those who are the loudest about their own abilities generally aren't in this camp. Humility tends to come with experience, and arrogance tends to come with inexperience.

[goatlover]

Conversely there's a massive amount of money being thrown around biased in favor of inflating what LLMs can do compared to humans.