I think this highlights one of the fundamental differences between humans and our current AI systems. They can still only try to solve problems in the given well defined parameters they are given (with some exceptions). The human is able in the effort to solve problems to intuit where there may be new interesting problems adjacent to the current problem.
I don't think we can confidently say, yet, that LLMs can't discover those connections. We just haven't explored them yet, because 99.99% of the prestige is locked up in proving hard results, which also happen to be easier to assess objectively (thanks to automated proof checkers), and so that's where all the effort has thus far been exerted.
LLMs can discover anything. It is just a matter of creating the right goal function and teaching it the right heuristics. Right now, humans are required because humans know what humans want, and LLMs are not good at predicting what humans want to the point where they can safely and autonomously run off on their own to solve problems we didn't know we had, or to define the problems we have that we're not good at defining ourselves.
Once that is cracked, you throw more compute at it and practically every industry will collapse on a long enough horizon - with digital industries going first. Anything that requires physical hardware will require time for the machines to bootstrap, but that'll get there too.
Although, there are a few human-centric industries that will survive, for example: prostitution. Maintaining it's edge as the world's oldest and most enduring profession.
Debatably in your scenario the last one will or is already falling with robots that will do that. I think there is a real philosophical question of whether AI will be eventually capable of everything we are. I think the question of what makes us unique as humans needs to be asked. I am inclined to think that there is always something that will separate us as human beings from digital robots. I just believe the language and reasoning used for the last 200 years is no longer sufficient. In 25-50 years I believe we will have a clearer picture. Your view essentially falls into a nihilistic framework if I am understanding it correctly.
Now the key question, can the hardware be made accessible to everyone. Its definitely an improvement to make self hosting software easier but the process of setting even a raspberry pi for an average consumer interested in self hosting is still a barrier. They probably will be able to figure it out via youtube and some reddit posts but there should be an easier process or way
(author here) I am really excited to make pre-configured Raspberry Pis that people can just plug in at home, and have it work out of the box. It'll take a bit more work to make it seamless but we're definitely aiming in that direction. It's a shame how expensive Pis have gotten recently though with the memory shortage.
That is cool to hear. I know lots of folks who would be genuinely interested in this who don't have the technological chops to set up a self hosted system. One angle i have heard is degoogling and having more privacy in their data. I am really genuinely interested in this venture. I had the same idea about a year ago but was not in a place in life to act on it. I think even with the PIs being expensive because of the people will still buy them. Especially if they are seamless or near seamless.
This is probably a smart move. Especially finger printing is more and more intelligent. If foreign actors are using exercise tracking apps to track US Military personnel and positions. It seems reasonable that they would want to block something that is much lower effort for tracking.
This is really sad to see. I didn't agree with him on much but his viewpoints and arguments definitely made me consider my assumptions about technology. It helped me reconsider whether it was always good for us as humans to make things easier and more convenient via technology. He helped me realize that sometimes to be human is to go through the process to see the fruit of your labor.
Honestly it would be helpful for someone to collect a list of these articles and concepts in a single location for engineers to get up to speed on these concepts. I think that is the only advantage of this AI generated website at the moment.
I hear the comments that state we should have sympathy for github. For the individual ops/sre I can have that sympathy because it must a heck of a time internally to manage things. I can't however have sympathy for company itself. They have not set themselves or the community for success. I think it is the responsibility of the company to anticipate the issues or at least react in a way that would build trust. The fact is there is a systemic issue in the company that causes the repeated unreliableness and they have not rooted it out.
This article seems to say that there is "no excuse" for these issues but look at all these things we changed and are changing. It doesn't really feel transparent and it feels like they aren't really taking true ownership on what has happened.
"It is the mistaken belief that the part should be epistemically sovereign over the whole. It is the futile attempt to squeeze a universe into a brain. It is the arrogance of putting oneself above “god(s)”."
This quote reminds me of reading Karl Truman in his book Desecration of Man. In that though Trueman makes the argument. Not only is it futile for us to try to put ourselves above God, but by trying to put ourselves above Him we desecrate him. Then for similar reason as this author states he says when we desecrate God, we desecrate ourselves.
So I believe the author gets things directionally correct but I would conclude that the meaning crisis comes down to more than just us losing ourselves and our place. We are actively destroying ourselves.
I think for Github to redeem itself in the community eyes, it should come out with a very detailed technical analysis (short of proprietary details) what went wrong technically and what went wrong from a management perspective. I think it is hard to believe the line about the LLM influx at this point. I think nothing short of a full postmortem break down will restore trust in Github at this point. Even then it Github has probably lost nearly all trust and ability to turn around its reputation in the short to medium term.
reply