I thought I'd give his podcast a listen a while back because it's good to keep an open mind.
Halfway through one episode, he mentioned his contact in the industry who was telling him about how the agents are actually useless and people have to do all this cleanup work to use the output they generate, and of course Ed promised his audience that's the entire industry and that the collapse was imminent.
That was right at the moment that the models were getting so good that we could "one shot" an issue.
I knew then and there this guy was hot air and I never took him seriously since.
> I knew then and there this guy was hot air and I never took him seriously since.
He's definitely not a software guy, and has been dead wrong on the software use-cases for LLMs. They are really, really bad in most other areas though (because we haven't built decent harnesses for broader "knowledge work").
We'll get there, but it'll take a decade or two. My plan is to ride this wave into retirement/death/immanence of the machine god, whichever comes first.
I've seen a lot of his interviews and he often makes two arguments:
1. LLMs are not fit for purpose and aren't nearly as useful as people say.
2. It is literally impossible for OpenAI and Anthropic to generate enough profits in the next decade for them to fulfill all of their obligations and return money to investors.
I agree that the first one is sometimes iffy, but even if you think LLMs will replace x% of white collar work by 2030, the second point remains.
Yeah, the Eurasian jay does this too, though they do it very defensively; they are often shy.
Jackdaws in the UK do it as well, but they definitely hang around like little gangs of urchins on people’s verges and front lawns; humans amuse them.
(They also grieve, despite what people say; I saw our local gang of six once, reduced to five, making odd quiet noises and unwilling to leave one of their gang that had been struck by a car and was quite obviously dead).
TIL. We hear and see the blue jays on our property frequently. We occasionally see a hawk but yet we hear hawk calls fairly frequently too. I always assumed I wasn't seeing the hawk. It never occurred to me another bird mimic the hawk calls. That's really interesting.
I can bet author didn't even read his own AI generated text.... I don't have any issue with AI, but it would be nice if people spend time over creating quality stuff.
Does it give you some kind of sense of accomplishment to lecture and shame people (who have no interest in your opinion) over their very mild critiques of AI writing style?
If you are going to be 'the-grump' you should find something interesting to be grumpy about, nobody wants to hear your "everyone should be nice all the time except me" horse crap. If it isn't intentional trolling you have next to zero insight into what you are actually doing.
And who has an interest in your opinion, pray tell.
I'll dish it out and dish it back, but I'll never talk down to someone because I don't like how they write or their method of solving problems. We are not all born with the same gifts (or with English as our native tongue).
That's what some here don't seem to understand, that there's a way to put things gently when you're addressing someone to their (virtual) face.
I wrote a mean response, but let me just say you are being overwhelmingly condescending starting with your initial response. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you don't know you are talking down to people, but you opened the door when you claim you did not talk down to them despite that being your primary interaction style. I encourage you to use AI to help edit your responses in the future if you are actually not aware of this.
I pasted it into chatgpt with the prompt "analyze the tone of the-grump and check for condescending language and tone. give examples if any." and here is what it says:
Yes, several of the-grump's comments read as condescending. Defending the author from harsh criticism is reasonable, but some of the language used in that defense also talks down to others.
Were you not also taught to "say something nice or nothing at all?"
This is the clearest example. Invoking a childhood manners lesson positions the other person as someone who needs basic correction.
You don't see how it's nasty, and then you pile your own nastiness on top.
This is scolding. It treats disagreement as a failure to recognize something obvious, rather than explaining which wording crossed a line.
Get a life ... instead of spilling your bile on somebody sharing their work.
This is primarily insulting and contemptuous. Hostility is clearer here than condescension specifically.
And who has an interest in your opinion, pray tell.
This is sarcastic and dismissive. "Pray tell" adds a mocking, superior tone, although the remark also echoes the preceding commenter's dismissal of the-grump's opinion.
That's what some here don't seem to understand, that there's a way to put things gently...
This presents others as lacking basic interpersonal understanding while placing the speaker in the role of teaching it.
I pinned 4.8 because 5 started to build the application on its own (native windows, visual studio NOT code). I wouldn't mind much except it seems to take much longer than me alt tabbing and hitting control+b.
Also it seems to start subagents for random stuff, it didn't before with my development style. And then the main thread gives you a partial answer and tells you it's waiting for the subagent to finish :) What's the point?
Fable 5: I give it work, it tells me things that are true and that make sense, it does good work.
Opus 5: I give it work, it makes false statements and draws weird conclusions, I correct it and get it on the right track, it thrashes around but gives me something working though usually buggy.
5.6 Sol is probably on par with Opus 5 on ability but at least it doesn't waste as much of my time.
Halfway through one episode, he mentioned his contact in the industry who was telling him about how the agents are actually useless and people have to do all this cleanup work to use the output they generate, and of course Ed promised his audience that's the entire industry and that the collapse was imminent.
That was right at the moment that the models were getting so good that we could "one shot" an issue.
I knew then and there this guy was hot air and I never took him seriously since.
Call this pitchforks.
reply