What tasks is it better at doing than other technologies we have available to us? I'm not being sarcastic, I generally want to know in which areas you think it is better.
I can't think of anything off the top of my head that isn't just doing the things that make it a generative AI. (It's better at generating an image that I describe to it, etc, but that's not something that another technology does.)
> What tasks is it better at doing than other technologies we have available to us? I'm not being sarcastic, I generally want to know in which areas you think it is better.
I, a below average programmer, can write code myself but it takes time and effort that is generally incompatible with my actual job. With an LLM I am able to write code with a level of time and effort that fits very nicely inside my job.
It can figure things out in a fraction of the time that it would take me. The limiting factor is no longer the depth of my technical knowledge but rather the knowledge of my business.
Sure, I could hire someone to do the coding for me but with an LLM available, why would I? And in that situation I would have to teach that person about the business because that would become their limiting factor if they could code as fast as the LLM.
As a fellow below average programmer I have used them for that, but it feels like a fairly minor improvement over searching stack overflow, but that is definitely an area where it is a time saver, thanks for the example.
I must be more below average than you because it's a huge improvement for me over stack overflow.
I'm doing mostly scripts (some Python but mostly Google Apps Scripts) to automate processes at a digital marketing agency. As long as I can clearly explain how our business works and what I'm trying to accomplish I'm getting working first drafts of things that would take me hours to write (a way worse version of) in 30-40 minutes – and 25-35 minutes of that is writing the prompt/documenting the automation I want made.
Google search + LLM based search is far more effective than Google search alone. Google's stated mission has been to organize the world's information. Being able to ask a far more nuanced question about the kind of information you are looking for - and getting mostly useful responses - is more useful. Just one example among many. Simple natural language interaction with computer systems is huge. Just look at what LLM's are doing for robotics.
Is it better than google search 20 years ago, when most web content was authoritative and not SEO crap?
Is it better than google search 20 year ago, when "google-fu" was a thing (look it up, google-fu refers to the ability to "ask a far more nuanced question about the kind of information you are looking for").
One very simple use case is making repetitive edits to a YAML (or similar) file. Sure, I can record a vim macro and/or try and conjure up some way to get it done with as few keystrokes as possible and hope I don’t fat finger anything along the way. Or I can just pipe it to llm and say [make this edit], and it just works.
Agreed, but the current class of rich people exist only within the context of those terrible racist things happening. Generational wealth was impossible to achieve for entire races of people, redlining isn't even that old. It's related.
There's not but it's a good heuristic. In pop music the average entropy is much lower, not only because the songs are simpler, but because they are more alike.
Are you quoting that "Measuring the Evolution of Contemporary Western Popular Music" paper? Anybody who knows about music disagrees with its methods. Here's a good rundown by a classical composer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfNdps0daF8
The only heuristic that matters the quality of pop music is "do people like it" and it's almost a tautology that pop music in any given time period passes it.
If people preferred more complicated music, then more complicated music would be popular and more of it would get made.
Okay, but you know that "good" and "worse" and subjective, relative terms? Just because you have your own reasons for something doesn't make them "objective", you just don't like modern pop music.
Since you're not required to listen to pop music, the average entropy is utterly irrelevant. If you prefer more complex music there is a huge amount out there, probably more than you can listen to.
Average artwork has always been garbage throughout human history. But I still found a few good paintings to hang on my walls. As long as you can get what you want it doesn't really matter what else is out there.
> Since you're not required to listen to pop music,
Is there a trick I'm missing to avoid this in {Ubers, grocery stores, bars, ...}? If so I'd love to know about it!
Note: am blind, so can't constantly wear earplugs.
Which state do you live in that penalizes you? Federally, you'd have to have a combined income of almost $700k for filing jointly to be a penalty and even then you don't have to file jointly.
My assumption would be that they're talking about implicitly penalizing single folks via the tax code rather than married couples. There are only two reasons why I would get married:
I can't think of anything off the top of my head that isn't just doing the things that make it a generative AI. (It's better at generating an image that I describe to it, etc, but that's not something that another technology does.)