He can fuck all the way off.
this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2025
173 points (89.9% liked)
Technology
63412 readers
6832 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Or just hire 50% more engineers? Or wait 50% longer?
with "hire more" you do run up against the "9 women can have a baby in 1 month" limit, but in this case it's likely to help.
They warn us about AGI while simultaneously attempting to sell it to us.
For how many years? Cuz y'all ain't anywhere near AGI. You can't even get generative AI to not suck compared to your competition in that market (which is a pretty low bar) lol
With all the rounds of layoffs they've had, their remaining employees would need to be quite stupid to give a shit what this disloyal piece trash says.
AGI is not in reach. We need to stop this incessant parroting from tech companies. LLMs are stochastic parrots. They guess the next word. There's no thought or reasoning. They don't understand inputs. They mimic human speech. They're not presenting anything meaningful.
That undersells them slightly.
LLMs are powerful tools for generating text that looks like something. Need something rephrased in a different style? They're good at that. Need something summarized? They can do that, too. Need a question answered? No can do.
LLMs can't generate answers to questions. They can only generate text that looks like answers to questions. Often enough that answer is even correct, though usually suboptimal. But they'll also happily generate complete bullshit answers and to them there's no difference to a real answer.
They're text transformers marketed as general problem solvers because a) the market for text transformers isn't that big and b) general problem solvers is what AI researchers are always trying to create. They have their use cases but certainly not ones worth the kind of spending they get.
I feel like I have found a lone voice of sanity in a jungle of brainless fanpeople sucking up the snake oil and pretending LLMs are AI. A simple control loop is closer to AI than a stochastic parrot, as you correctly put it.
There are at least three of us.
I am worried what happens when the bubble finally pops because shit always rolls downhill and most of us are at the bottom of the hill.
Not sure if we need that particular bubble to pop for us to be drowned in a sea of shit, looking at the state of the world right now :( But silicon valley seems to be at the core of this clusterfuck, as if all the villains form there or flock there...
If it's in reach working 60 hour weeks, it's also in reach working 40 hour weeks, it will just take 1/3rd longer. ;)
50%
Let's be real, it'll probably happen faster on 40 hour work weeks than 60.
lots of evidence starting to point to it'd be quicker in 32 hour weeks than 40
Let's work 20 hour weeks then. Who wants AGI other than war pigs and billionaires?
I mean, we could get a rogue agi take over the world. It might not even be worse lmao
WarPigs by Sabbath was about the future.
"Work 50% longer weeks so you can make something that'll both make me richer AND cost you your jobs!" is not the motivational speech he thinks it is.
I don't even know what AGI is, and I read the headline as "rich disconnected from reality asshole".
Turns out I was right.
A General ignoramus
Wait, are these AI boosters bragging about how close they are to building God the torture that Roko's Basilisk is inflicting on us all?
Hahaha
If it can be reached in 60 hour work weeks it can be reached in 40, but nah mfs should rush to get themselves replaced
If it can be reached in 60 hour work weeks, then it can be reached in 40 hour work weeks be hiring a second person.
If management isn't willing to put the effort in of hiring the required staff, why would I want to work the job of 2 people for 1 persons pay?
IT project management doesn't work that way, but it doesn't matter much. 60 hour work weeks wouldn't help, either.
That's why I bake my cake at 2608°C for ~1,8 minutes, it just works™
You can’t produce a baby in one month by getting nine women pregnant.
Project Manager here, and where I’m from it’s common knowledge that 9 women can have a baby in a month .
Or!—hear me out—one woman whose 8 co-gestators were just laid off by someone who doesn’t understand what their job was
load more comments
(2 replies)
So he's saying it's not in reach then.
lol, because if they work 40-hour weeks they might create it a couple of weeks later
Or, worse, they might actually have to hire enough people to actually do the job. Why hire 100 people with good work life balance, when you can hire 60 people that aren't allowed to have lives or families.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Or, y'know, he could hire 50% more programmers / contractors, instead of overworking his current staff
There's an upper limit to how many bodies you can throw at a task.
9 women won't make a baby in one month.
But you can make an average of 1 baby a month in 9 months with 9 woman. It's all about proper planning and budgeting over longer periods.
load more comments
(2 replies)
That wouldn't allow him to also simultaneously pay low wages.
load more comments
(3 replies)
This is almost too depressing to be funny.
They talk about AGI like it's some kind of intrinsically benevolent messiah that is going to come along and free humanity of limitations rather than a product that is going to be monetised to make a few very rich people even richer
load more comments
(4 replies)
You know it's bad when I had to click all the way through to the body of the article to verify this isn't a The Onion thing. Do we still have a "Not The Onion" space here?
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›