[windward]

>(perhaps guide them how they can use them professionally)

If that's anything like how they guided me to use programming languages professionally...

In my workplace I find systems and policies move too slowly to keep up with how rapidly the LLM world is changing. Colleges are even more glacial. They've barely adapted to video conferencing.

[jakolaptu]

How do they keep up? Honestly it’s too risky to make a serious move on such a fast-paced environment.

The only thing I can see them doing is removing technology altogether. People did just fine 100 years ago.

Want to learn to code? Use a Commodore 64. The company was purchased and rebooted the C64: https://commodore.net/

[mrngld]

Yes, meanwhile, Claude Cowork was only released this past January. And that was amazing. But I don't know about anyone else but I've already moved on to just using Codex for just about everything (except some Kagi use). Schools work on timescales of years, AI is advancing on the timescale of weeks and months.

Until that situation stabilizes I think the only institution capable of teaching about it is the family -- parents.

[thewebguyd]

I'm not sure parents have the right tools either. Microsoft is about to ship OpenClaw as part of windows (talked about at BUILD) and they're acting like it's production ready and they've solved the security issues.

I don't believe them for one second, it's far from a solved problem yet these companies are selling this tech as if it's been around for decades and thoroughly battle tested instead of highly experimental and unstable.

[aleph_minus_one]

> In my workplace I find systems and policies move too slowly to keep up with how rapidly the LLM world is changing. Colleges are even more glacial.

Perhaps this is rather a sign that you currently shouldn't jump on the LLM hype train, but rather attempt to get a good foundation on the basics. When the whole LLM area becomes much more "stabilized" (I see signs that this is currently happening, if only for the reason that training state of the art models has become more and more expensive), you can still get into LLMs if you want.

[windward]

I partly agree, depending on what you count as the basics. I don't think there's much value in learning the quirks of LLMs today: they will just change, your value-add becomes part of the model or harness.

On the other hand I think there are real development gains in jumping on the train today. To my career's detriment.

[thewebguyd]

Traditionally, moving slow with policies was fine with new tech because, outside of the PC revolution it wasn't all that impactful, and things used to rightly be labeled as experimental so you could safely ignore it for a while as a big enterprise and be just fine until thinks shook out.

LLMs were, IMO, pushed out too early and without that clear "this is experimental tech" label. Full public access from day 1, no invite only betas, no research previews for a select few pilot customers/orgs, etc. I've been in IT for a little over 18 years now and I haven't seen anything move this fast before.

I mean, I never though I'd see Microsoft go on stage at BUILD and and announce freaking OpenClaw for Enterprise, and then make it available the same day. This is highly unstable tech and what I'd consider still experimental, being sold to F500s as production ready.

[samsolomon]

Ancient brains, medieval institutions, godlike technology.

Tristan Harris had some sort of comment like that on a podcast about the challenges posed by AI.

[windward]

I think it's incredible how much those ancient brains can successfully adapt to technology. Some people can sit in highly-strung sports cars and use them at the absolute limit of their performance like they're just an extension of our own limbs and senses.