Interesting, in my experience LLMs hallucinate so much on stuffs I know about that I instinctively challenge most of their assumptions and outputs, and found out that this kind of dialectic exchange bring the most out of the "relationship" so to speak, co creating something greater than the isolation of us two.
I haven't used LLMs a lot and have just experimented with them in terms of coding.
But about a year ago, I had a job to clean up a bunch of, let's call them, reference architectures. I mostly didn't mess with the actual architecture part or went directly to the original authors.
But there wasn't a lot of context setting and background for a lot of them. None of it was rocket science; I could have written myself. But the LLM I used, Bard at the time, gave me a pretty good v 0.9 for some introductory paragraphs. Nothing revelatory but probably saved me an hour or two per architecture even including my time to fixup the results. Generally, nothing was absolutely wrong but some I felt was less relevant and other stuff I felt was missing.
It's funny because I rarely seen this (wrong approach) done anywhere else but I pick it up by myself (like a lot did I presume) and still am the first to do it everytime I see the occasion, not so for optimizations (while I admit I thought it wouldn't hurt) but for the flow and natural look of it. It feels somehow more right to me to compose effect by signals interpolations rather than clear ternary branch instructions.
Now I'll have to change my ways in fear of being rejected socially for this newly approved bad practice.
At least in WebGPU's WGSL we have the `select` instruction that does that ternary operation hidden as a method, so there is that.
> All of this led to quite a vicious backlash against me personally, with countless angry comments about and directed at me across YouTube and social media, which included many death threats and threats of violence (although I should be clear that while these threats were numerous and graphic, I doubt any of them were “credible” from a law enforcement standpoint, i. e. I did not have actual reason to fear for my safety).
While I understand how, from the public perspective, you can be despised by the work and influence of powerful individual that can shape collective narrative and "destroy the things you love", I'm always a bit confused about death threats. I get this come from a vocale minority, not the majority of the mob, and maybe linked to a Flanderization of view on a public yet anonymous space that most often than not have no real will to be executed, but still, how you end up being that kind of a person ?
As cool it might get to badmouth the new generation and how everything is getting south, I have found more and more attempts to get back to a more convivial and humane approach to medias, especially of the literacy kind, with Reviews and Journals for niche audiences of peculiar aesthetic and intellectual values.
Granted, we've seen similar fashion in the past with blog, and then with the mailing list revival, which both quickly get preempted - commodified even - by the marketing squads that devitalize every new media by their unending eager to devour their techs and cloaca'd them into ad platform trend.
But it's my earnest feeling that the AI-ssistant behemoth, still quite roboto in its fake expertise and sanitized answers, could be easily defeated by the willingness for poetry and the new form language and our creativity would take to circumvent it.
We easily get sidetracked by boredom, but humans are creature hooked on authenticity.
80's Punks were the Tricksters of ancient mythology (eg. Coyote in amerindians culture), it always been the role of those at the margins of Society dealing with uncomfortable other realities, bringing liminal space into our collective consciousness. Punks are not dead, they (or more precisely their archetypal essence) have just shape shifted into another form we fail to recognize as we age while their prior shell have been consumed by mass media and commodification.
Chances are the future generation Punks are either that itch we can't quite name or out of our generational perception altogether.
I like to say we, as human, are all « shaman » : we're structuring chaos into order.
Any job is just that, it's a story, it's transforming & aggregating bits of the information field into another, surrounding it by meaning in the process.
I don't care if you work with computer, as a social worker or as a fisherman. You're just transforming bits mate.
I can imagine they'll take the angle it helps improve the "brand-awareness" which supposedly bring them more profits in the long run.
For some non-profit I've given to I've received more donation reminder letters that my one time donation would have cover for.