Wow! Amazing post! You really nailed the complexities of AI browsers in ways that most people don't think about. I think there's also a doom paradox where if more people search with AI, this disincentives people from posting on their own blog and websites where incentives are usually ads could help support them. If AI is crawling and then spitting back information from your blog (you get no revenue), is there a point to post at all?
One possibility I like to imagine is a future where knowledge sources are used kind of like tools, i.e. the model never uses any preexisting knowledge from its training data (beyond what’s necessary to be fluent in English, coherent, logical, etc.), a “blank” intelligent being, tabula rasa. And for answering questions it uses various sources dynamically, like an agent would use tools.
I think this will let models be much smaller (and cheaper), but it would also enable a mechanism for monetizing knowledge. This would make knowledge sharing profitable.
For example, a user asks a question, the model asks knowledge sources if they have relevant information and how much it costs (maybe some other metadata like perceived relevance or quality or whatever), and then it decides (dynamically) which source(s) to use in order to compile an answer (decision could be based on past user feedback, similarly to PageRank).
One issue is that this incentivizes content users want to hear versus content they don’t want to hear but is true. But this is a problem we already have, long before AI or even the internet.
> If you post for ad revenue, I truly feel sorry for you.
I think this is a bit dismissive towards people who create content because they enjoy doing it but also could not do it to this level without the revenue, like many indie Youtubers.
If I could press a button and remove money from the internet, I'd do it in a heartbeat.
I absolutely do enjoy content that is financed through ads. I really, REALLY do like some of the stuff, honest. But it is also the case that the internet has been turning into a marketing hellscape for the last couple decades, we've gotten to a point in which engagement is optimized to such a degree that society itself is hurting from it. Politically and psychologically. The damage is hard to quantify, yet I can't fathom the opportunity cost not being well into the billions.
Hey HN! I'm a CS student and I've been learning about mapping algorithms. I decided to combine it in a cool way to show people how Google Maps works under the hood. I combined knowledge I learned in my algorithms classes as well as online forums and blogs. Let me know what you think!
Whoa! this is really cool! I'm an avid chess player and I love this idea! The only thing is I wish there was a "How to Play" or "Rules" page on the main page. I'm still struggling to understand how to play this game.
I definitely need a rules page. But I think more than that I need to more clearly communicate during gameplay where people are in the hand. So for example, if you're playing with 2 pawn rounds and then 2 piece rounds (and, say, with "bet after each piece" turned on) there should be some visual representation of where the player is in that sequence at any given moment.
Or if you have the "bet every 11 moves" setting turned on, there should be a countdown while playing in the chess phase how many more moves until the next betting round.
I used to do reading challenges based on books read, but I found a better alternative: pages. If you focus on pages read, you don't have sunken cost while reading a book and you can stop reading if the book stops being interesting. Pages read is less satisfying, but I've found it gives me a better reading experience.
That's a great point. I did get into the Murderbot Diary novellas this year and it's unfair (by page count) that they count as full books in the challenge.
I will say, when I'm using my e-reader, I use a percentage as guidance for progress versus page count, so I almost no longer ever know how long my books are.
Those are awesome book, but short. From the time I started the first page of the first to the time after I finished them all and pre-ordered the next was maybe 9 days.
I'm an incoming freshman to college for CS and I've thought about this a lot. Here's some of my thoughts:
1. There has always been competition in CS. If not LLMs, there are international developers and bootcamp people and just regular engineers. However, good software engineers from universities are still finding good jobs. Generalists are common, specialists are hard to find and companies will pay the specialists what they are worth.
2. Modern software engineers reply on networks similar to LLMs all the time. Think StackOverFlow or google. LLMs will just be able to generate better responses that will be quicker to find.
3. If there is a LLM that can program as good as a well educated SWE, many more jobs will be replaced besides programming. I reckon a LLM will have a much easier time understanding physics, which changes a lot less than CS.
4. Don't concentrate all learning in one place! You could do a double major with physics or a minor. You could do computer engineering or you could do a business minor with CS. Nobody knows the future, we can only guess. However, in the case that CS becomes totally replaceable by LLMs, it will be good to have other skills.
5. Remember that your major does not define you! I know many people who studied physics in college and ended up in the banking industry. Many others who studied engineering ended up in a software development role. Just because you chose a major now does not mean it defines you for the rest of your life. You can always pivot careers, go to grad school, or shift departments within your company!
It is more about becoming a specialist in a subset of CS where
think you may be thinking about it
1. Programmers will always be needed for maintaining and upgrading LLMs.
Exactly. I think there are really 3 main ways I view time spent.
- 1. Time spent learning a skill with economic value.
- 2. Time spent for leasure.
- 3. Time spent to fulfill biological needs (eating, sleep, etc.)
No. 1 can be pretty subjective and time where input does not correlate to output. Ages ago, learning to be a blacksmith was a very economically in-demand skill, but today it would at best be considered a hobby. No. 1 is time spent to obtain needs as well as wants. Everyone must have some source of income for food, shelter, etc.
No. 2 can be anything that one does for enjoyment. I find it pointless to argue about what kind of enjoyment is "productive" or "wasteful" because each form of enjoyment is just getting better at a skill whether that be video games or playing violin. The only "productive" entertainment would be something that advances your economic value (thus being more of a No. 1 spend of time.
The best would be to try and combine time into something that is both advances your economic value as well as is something you enjoy.
https://www.allzgo.com/
Inspired by shot tracer in golf as well as the "10 yard line" in football.
Also built secretsofmaps.com (but that's more a side project) Would love some feedback!