Quotations tagged ai
Filters: Type: quotation × ai × Sorted by date
I think that a lot of resistance to AI coding tools comes from the same place: fear of losing something that has defined you for so long. People are reacting against overblown hype, and there is overblown hype. I get that, but I also think there’s something deeper going on here. When you’ve worked hard to build your skills, when coding is part of your identity and where you get your worth, the idea of a tool that might replace some of that is very threatening.
— Adam Gordon Bell, When AI Codes, What’s Left for me?
One of the best examples of LLM developer tooling I've heard is from a team that supports software from the 80s-90s. Their only source of documentation is video interviews with retired employees. So they feed them into transcription software and get summarized searchable notes out the other end.
— Kevin Webb, a couple million lines of Smalltalk
To misuse a woodworking metaphor, I think we’re experiencing a shift from hand tools to power tools.
You still need someone who understands the basics to get the good results out of the tools, but they’re not chiseling fine furniture by hand anymore, they’re throwing heaps of wood through the tablesaw instead. More productive, but more likely to lose a finger if you’re not careful.
— mrmincent, Hacker News comment on Claude Code
Creating art is a nonlinear process. I start with a rough goal. But then I head into dead ends and get lost or stuck.
The secret to my process is to be on high alert in this deep jungle for unexpected twists and turns, because this is where a new idea is born.
I can't make art when I'm excluded from the most crucial moments.
— Christoph Niemann, An Illustrator Confronts His Fears About A.I. Art
So you can think really big thoughts and the leverage of having those big thoughts has just suddenly expanded enormously. I had this tweet two years ago where I said "90% of my skills just went to zero dollars and 10% of my skills just went up 1000x". And this is exactly what I'm talking about - having a vision, being able to set milestones towards that vision, keeping track of a design to maintain or control the levels of complexity as you go forward. Those are hugely leveraged skills now compared to knowing where to put the ampersands and the stars and the brackets in Rust.
— Kent Beck, interview with Gergely Orosz
Is it safe to say that LLMs are, in essence, making us "dumber"?
No! Please do not use the words like “stupid”, “dumb”, “brain rot”, "harm", "damage", and so on. It does a huge disservice to this work, as we did not use this vocabulary in the paper, especially if you are a journalist reporting on it.
— FAQ for Your Brain on ChatGPT, a paper that has attracted a lot of low quality coverage
Radiology has embraced AI enthusiastically, and the labor force is growing nevertheless. The augmentation-not-automation effect of AI is despite the fact that AFAICT there is no identified "task" at which human radiologists beat AI. So maybe the "jobs are bundles of tasks" model in labor economics is incomplete. [...]
Can you break up your own job into a set of well-defined tasks such that if each of them is automated, your job as a whole can be automated? I suspect most people will say no. But when we think about other people's jobs that we don't understand as well as our own, the task model seems plausible because we don't appreciate all the nuances.
They poison their own context. Maybe you can call it context rot, where as context grows and especially if it grows with lots of distractions and dead ends, the output quality falls off rapidly. Even with good context the rot will start to become apparent around 100k tokens (with Gemini 2.5).
They really need to figure out a way to delete or "forget" prior context, so the user or even the model can go back and prune poisonous tokens.
Right now I work around it by regularly making summaries of instances, and then spinning up a new instance with fresh context and feed in the summary of the previous instance.
— Workaccount2 on Hacker News, coining "context rot"
There’s a new breed of GenAI Application Engineers who can build more-powerful applications faster than was possible before, thanks to generative AI. Individuals who can play this role are highly sought-after by businesses, but the job description is still coming into focus. [...]
Skilled GenAI Application Engineers meet two primary criteria: (i) They are able to use the new AI building blocks to quickly build powerful applications. (ii) They are able to use AI assistance to carry out rapid engineering, building software systems in dramatically less time than was possible before. In addition, good product/design instincts are a significant bonus.
[on the cheaper o3] Not quantized. Weights are the same.
If we did change the model, we'd release it as a new model with a new name in the API (e.g., o3-turbo-2025-06-10). It would be very annoying to API customers if we ever silently changed models, so we never do this [1].
[1]
chatgpt-4o-latestbeing an explicit exception
— Ted Sanders, Research Manager, OpenAI
(People are often curious about how much energy a ChatGPT query uses; the average query uses about 0.34 watt-hours, about what an oven would use in a little over one second, or a high-efficiency lightbulb would use in a couple of minutes. It also uses about 0.000085 gallons of water; roughly one fifteenth of a teaspoon.)
— Sam Altman, The Gentle Singularity
The process of learning and experimenting with LLM-derived technology has been an exercise in humility. In general I love learning new things when the art of programming changes […] But LLMs, and more specifically Agents, affect the process of writing programs in a new and confusing way. Absolutely every fundamental assumption about how I work has to be questioned, and it ripples through all the experience I have accumulated. There are days when it feels like I would be better off if I did not know anything about programming and started from scratch. And it is still changing.
— David Crawshaw, How I program with Agents
For [Natasha] Lyonne, the draw of AI isn’t speed or scale — it’s independence. “I’m not trying to run a tech company,” she told me. “It’s more that I’m a filmmaker who doesn’t want the tech people deciding the future of the medium.” She imagines a future in which indie filmmakers can use AI tools to reclaim authorship from studios and avoid the compromises that come with chasing funding in a broken system.
“We need some sort of Dogme 95 for the AI era,” Lyonne said, referring to the stripped-down 1990s filmmaking movement started by Lars von Trier and Thomas Vinterberg, which sought to liberate cinema from an overreliance on technology. “If we could just wrangle this artist-first idea before it becomes industry standard to not do it that way, that’s something I would be interested in working on. Almost like we are not going to go quietly into the night.”
— Lila Shapiro, Everyone Is Already Using AI (And Hiding It), New York Magazine
By making effort an optional factor in higher education rather than the whole point of it, LLMs risk producing a generation of students who have simply never experienced the feeling of focused intellectual work. Students who have never faced writer's block are also students who have never experienced the blissful flow state that comes when you break through writer's block. Students who have never searched fruitlessly in a library for hours are also students who, in a fundamental and distressing way, simply don't know what a library is even for.
— Benjamin Breen, AI makes the humanities more important, but also a lot weirder
It took me a few days to build the library [cloudflare/workers-oauth-provider] with AI.
I estimate it would have taken a few weeks, maybe months to write by hand.
That said, this is a pretty ideal use case: implementing a well-known standard on a well-known platform with a clear API spec.
In my attempts to make changes to the Workers Runtime itself using AI, I've generally not felt like it saved much time. Though, people who don't know the codebase as well as I do have reported it helped them a lot.
I have found AI incredibly useful when I jump into other people's complex codebases, that I'm not familiar with. I now feel like I'm comfortable doing that, since AI can help me find my way around very quickly, whereas previously I generally shied away from jumping in and would instead try to get someone on the team to make whatever change I needed.
— Kenton Varda, in a Hacker News comment
My constant struggle is how to convince them that getting an education in the humanities is not about regurgitating ideas/knowledge that already exist. It’s about generating new knowledge, striving for creative insights, and having thoughts that haven’t been had before. I don’t want you to learn facts. I want you to think. To notice. To question. To reconsider. To challenge. Students don’t yet get that ChatGPT only rearranges preexisting ideas, whether they are accurate or not.
And even if the information was guaranteed to be accurate, they’re not learning anything by plugging a prompt in and turning in the resulting paper. They’ve bypassed the entire process of learning.
There's a new kind of coding I call "hype coding" where you fully give into the hype, and what's coming right around the corner, that you lose sight of whats' possible today. Everything is changing so fast that nobody has time to learn any tool, but we should aim to use as many as possible. Any limitation in the technology can be chalked up to a 'skill issue' or that it'll be solved in the next AI release next week. Thinking is dead. Turn off your brain and let the computer think for you. Scroll on tiktok while the armies of agents code for you. If it isn't right, tell it to try again. Don't read. Feed outputs back in until it works. If you can't get it to work, wait for the next model or tool release. Maybe you didn't use enough MCP servers? Don't forget to add to the hype cycle by aggrandizing all your successes. Don't read this whole tweet, because it's too long. Get an AI to summarize it for you. Then call it "cope". Most importantly, immediately mischaracterize "hype coding" to mean something different than this definition. Oh the irony! The people who don't care about details don't read the details about not reading the details
Speaking of the effects of technology on individuals and society as a whole, Marshall McLuhan wrote that every augmentation is also an amputation. [...] Today, quite suddenly, billions of people have access to AI systems that provide augmentations, and inflict amputations, far more substantial than anything McLuhan could have imagined. This is the main thing I worry about currently as far as AI is concerned. I follow conversations among professional educators who all report the same phenomenon, which is that their students use ChatGPT for everything, and in consequence learn nothing. We may end up with at least one generation of people who are like the Eloi in H.G. Wells’s The Time Machine, in that they are mental weaklings utterly dependent on technologies that they don’t understand and that they could never rebuild from scratch were they to break down.
— Neal Stephenson, Remarks on AI from NZ
By popular request, GPT-4.1 will be available directly in ChatGPT starting today.
GPT-4.1 is a specialized model that excels at coding tasks & instruction following. Because it’s faster, it’s a great alternative to OpenAI o3 & o4-mini for everyday coding needs.
I did find one area where LLMs absolutely excel, and I’d never want to be without them:
AIs can find your syntax error 100x faster than you can.
They’ve been a useful tool in multiple areas, to my surprise. But this is the one space where they’ve been an honestly huge help: I know I’ve made a mistake somewhere and I just can’t track it down. I can spend ten minutes staring at my files and pulling my hair out, or get an answer back in thirty seconds.
There are whole categories of coding problems that look like this, and LLMs are damn good at nearly all of them. [...]
— Luke Kanies, AI Is Like a Crappy Consultant
Contributions must not include content generated by large language models or other probabilistic tools, including but not limited to Copilot or ChatGPT. This policy covers code, documentation, pull requests, issues, comments, and any other contributions to the Servo project. [...]
Our rationale is as follows:
Maintainer burden: Reviewers depend on contributors to write and test their code before submitting it. We have found that these tools make it easy to generate large amounts of plausible-looking code that the contributor does not understand, is often untested, and does not function properly. This is a drain on the (already limited) time and energy of our reviewers.
Correctness and security: Even when code generated by AI tools does seem to function, there is no guarantee that it is correct, and no indication of what security implications it may have. A web browser engine is built to run in hostile execution environments, so all code must take into account potential security issues. Contributors play a large role in considering these issues when creating contributions, something that we cannot trust an AI tool to do.
Copyright issues: [...] Ethical issues:: [...] These are harms that we do not want to perpetuate, even if only indirectly.
— Contributing to Servo, section on AI contributions
If Claude is asked to count words, letters, and characters, it thinks step by step before answering the person. It explicitly counts the words, letters, or characters by assigning a number to each. It only answers the person once it has performed this explicit counting step. [...]
If Claude is shown a classic puzzle, before proceeding, it quotes every constraint or premise from the person’s message word for word before inside quotation marks to confirm it’s not dealing with a new variant. [...]
If asked to write poetry, Claude avoids using hackneyed imagery or metaphors or predictable rhyming schemes.
— Claude's system prompt, via Drew Breunig
But I’ve also had my own quiet concerns about what [vibe coding] means for early-career developers. So much of how I learned came from chasing bugs in broken tutorials and seeing how all the pieces connected, or didn’t. There was value in that. And maybe I’ve been a little protective of it.
A mentor challenged that. He pointed out that debugging AI generated code is a lot like onboarding into a legacy codebase, making sense of decisions you didn’t make, finding where things break, and learning to trust (or rewrite) what’s already there. That’s the kind of work a lot of developers end up doing anyway.
— Ashley Willis, What Even Is Vibe Coding?
That's it. I've had it. I'm putting my foot down on this craziness.
1. Every reporter submitting security reports on #Hackerone for #curl now needs to answer this question:
"Did you use an AI to find the problem or generate this submission?"
(and if they do select it, they can expect a stream of proof of actual intelligence follow-up questions)
2. We now ban every reporter INSTANTLY who submits reports we deem AI slop. A threshold has been reached. We are effectively being DDoSed. If we could, we would charge them for this waste of our time.
We still have not seen a single valid security report done with AI help.
Two things can be true simultaneously: (a) LLM provider cost economics are too negative to return positive ROI to investors, and (b) LLMs are useful for solving problems that are meaningful and high impact, albeit not to the AGI hype that would justify point (a). This particular combination creates a frustrating gray area that requires a nuance that an ideologically split social media can no longer support gracefully. [...]
OpenAI collapsing would not cause the end of LLMs, because LLMs are useful today and there will always be a nonzero market demand for them: it’s a bell that can’t be unrung.
[On using generative AI for work despite the risk of errors:]
- AI is helpful despite being error-prone if it is faster to verify the output than it is to do the work yourself. For example, if you're using it to find a product that matches a given set of specifications, verification may be a lot faster than search.
- There are many uses where errors don't matter, like using it to enhance creativity by suggesting or critiquing ideas.
- At a meta level, if you use AI without a plan and simply turn to AI tools when you feel like it, then you're unlikely to be able to think through risks and mitigations. It is better to identify concrete ways to integrate AI into your workflows, with known benefits and risks, that you can employ repeatedly.
You also mentioned the whole Chatbot Arena thing, which I think is interesting and points to the challenge around how you do benchmarking. How do you know what models are good for which things?
One of the things we've generally tried to do over the last year is anchor more of our models in our Meta AI product north star use cases. The issue with open source benchmarks, and any given thing like the LM Arena stuff, is that they’re often skewed toward a very specific set of uses cases, which are often not actually what any normal person does in your product. [...]
So we're trying to anchor our north star on the product value that people report to us, what they say that they want, and what their revealed preferences are, and using the experiences that we have. Sometimes these benchmarks just don't quite line up. I think a lot of them are quite easily gameable.
On the Arena you'll see stuff like Sonnet 3.7, which is a great model, and it's not near the top. It was relatively easy for our team to tune a version of Llama 4 Maverick that could be way at the top. But the version we released, the pure model, actually has no tuning for that at all, so it's further down. So you just need to be careful with some of these benchmarks. We're going to index primarily on the products.
— Mark Zuckerberg, on Dwarkesh Patel's podcast
When we were first shipping Memory, the initial thought was: “Let’s let users see and edit their profiles”. Quickly learned that people are ridiculously sensitive: “Has narcissistic tendencies” - “No I do not!”, had to hide it.
— Mikhail Parakhin, talking about Bing
Betting on mobile made all the difference. We're making a similar call now, and this time the platform shift is AI.
AI isn't just a productivity boost. It helps us get closer to our mission. To teach well, we need to create a massive amount of content, and doing that manually doesn't scale. One of the best decisions we made recently was replacing a slow, manual content creation process with one powered by AI. Without AI, it would take us decades to scale our content to more learners. We owe it to our learners to get them this content ASAP. [...]
We'll be rolling out a few constructive constraints to help guide this shift:
- We'll gradually stop using contractors to do work that AI can handle
- AI use will be part of what we look for in hiring
- AI use will be part of what we evaluate in performance reviews
- Headcount will only be given if a team cannot automate more of their work
- Most functions will have specific initiatives to fundamentally change how they work [...]
— Luis von Ahn, Duolingo all-hands memo, shared on LinkedIn
the last couple of GPT-4o updates have made the personality too sycophant-y and annoying (even though there are some very good parts of it), and we are working on fixes asap, some today and some this week.