Do what? Setup a corporations, handle logistics, pay the accountant, open a bank account? I mean, there's more to running a company than writing the code and fixing bugs (assuming AI will get better and not worst at it as time goes by).

Outside the HN bubble, from an entrepreneurial perspective a programmer is an expensive machine that implements ideas into code. No one cares if it's in rust or cobol, if it runs in O(1) or O(log n), etc.

So in that sense, make some jobs are under threat but most likely something else will come along.

<HERE BE DRAGONS>That's human history and tbh... can't wait for an UBI-based + social welfare future.</HERE BE DRAGONS>

They invested in OpenAI, which was a smart move.

What a wild change in fortune that would be.

OpenAI/Microsoft looked to be forever ahead, but maybe this is the break everyone else needs to catch up.

I'll be really happy if we wind up with more companies owning different parts of the market rather than just FAANG at the top. Or more competition in general.

I don't see how it does anything but progress. I obviously have no idea how long it will take before it can replace a software engineer but after playing around with ChatGPT and seeing the code it can create, it's definitely progressing faster than I thought it would.

That means something more sophisticated has to exist today and should be commercially available. Can anyone explain to what extent companies use this stuff in their interaction with customers, and how successful is it? (Somehow I still see AI still as one-off things people do for fun or AI being used to hype up rather mundane software.)

By all means, go do your startup, all the power to you.

But I personally fail to see it creating enough value for people to even bother use the AI, even if it's free and any problem could be ignored.

I can imagine people adopting it if it comes embedded on whatever software they already use. But that doesn't "completely change everything" or any of the other things people are repeating.

And yeah, I can't imagine it quickly improving so that happens either. I am personally bracing for a new AI winter, and believe that word is going to become more toxic than it has ever been.

It is, as long as you have reason to assume that you will be ABLE to automate the tasks. For many of these tasks, there is NO reason to assume that.

My feeling with AI tasks is that either they work reasonably well after a short time or they will never work well. (At least not until the next AI revolution.)

If a company doesn't have a good enough AI system for their task after a couple of months of toying with it, I will be Very sceptical that they will ever have one.

How long did you take to develop this integration? How many thousands of hours? If just a few, do you really think that some code snippet you patch in a few hours is good enough to take over the world and make people go out of their way to try your software? It is not that good yet, I'm sure of it. Isn't it just a ChatGPT wrapper after all?

Most people extracting value from it are doing it directly on openai offer.

It has been. But the current crop of AI is different. It has very notable limits but it's helpful. I've started to use it myself and it's made a difference already. It can produce first drafts of emails and memos very quickly for me. I can then edit them at will. It's very much like an assistant.

It's been at least 2 decades since I have had a new software app change my work life. Yes, this time is different.

That's not how I would paraphrase most of the comments here. At least the ones I'm seeing are closer to: "it's really neat as far as free demos go, but ultimately is not that useful and not worth paying for."

My current prediction is that this coming recession and the increasing cost of money is going to lead directly to a new AI winter. This almost goes without saying for the mountains of useless ML projects being churned out by DS teams in companies big and small. However, even for this very expensive well staffed projects, there's still a gap between amazing demo and game changing product that none of the recent AI projects have been able to close. After billions poured into these demos, in the past 10 years very little of daily life has been impacted by AI and in 10 more years even less will since companies will stop forcing useless AI projects on customers.

As someone with a lot of experience in ML/DS, I would recommend everyone in this field start thinking about how to reimagine your resume for something else. There's going to be a massive contraction in this space once the cheap money starts flowing.

I don't think AI businesses are jokes, so long as you're selling a platform or a way to customize AI to some specific need or hardware. AI is a gold rush, and the most reliable way to get rich in a gold rush is to sell shovels.

But if you want to make money from actually using AI yourself, then yeah, you've gotta have a business that AI makes better.

> In fact, this is pretty much how we started out with Cody autocomplete back in March!

Am I wrong in thinking that there's only like 3(?) actual AI companies and everything else is just some frontend to ChatGPT/LLama/Claude?

Is this sustainable? I guess the car industry is full of rebadged models with the same engines and chassis. It's just wild that we keep hearing about the AI boom as though there's a vibrant competitive ecosystem and not just Nvidia, a couple of software partners and then a sea of whiteboxers.

I love this paragraph. I think that generative AI companies, especially OpenAI, have completely dropped the ball when it comes to their marketing.

The narrative (that these companies encourage and often times are responsible for) is that AI is intelligent and will be a replacement for humans in the near future. So is it really a surprise when people do things like this?

LLMs don’t shine as independent agents. They shine when they augment our skills. Microsoft has the right idea by calling everything “copilot”, but unfortunately OpenAI drives the narrative, not Microsoft.

I kind of feel like their walled garden and ecosystem might just have created the perfect environment for an AI integrated directly to the platform to be really useful.

I’m encouraged, but I am already a fan of the ecosystem…

I'm with you, I'm most excited about this too.

Currently building an AI creative studio (make stories, art, music, videos, etc.) that runs locally/offline (https://github.com/bennyschmidt/ragdoll-studio). There is a lot of focus on cloud with LLMs but I can't see how the cost will make much sense for involved creative apps like video creation, etc. Present day users might not have high-end machines, but I think they all will pretty soon - this will make them buy them the way MMORPGs made everyone buy more RAM. Especially the artists and creators. Remember, Photoshop was once pretty difficult to run, you needed a great machine.

I can imagine offline music/movies apps, offline search engines, back office software, etc.

Its unfortunate, but just fixing and making an existing product awesome has lower ROI than implementing good-enough features that your competitor has. It may sound stupid, but works business wise.

Take what you did in the past year. Write down every product decision taken, every interaction with other teams figuring out APIs you had, all the infra where your code is running and how it was setup and changed, all the design iterations and changes that had to be implemented (especially if you have external partners demanding it).

Yes. All that you'd have to input into the AI, and hope it outputs something decent given all that. And yes, you'll have to feed all that into AI all the time because it has no knowledge or memory of "on Monday the new company bet was announced in the all hands"

You will be fine.

I don't think it will. Level off - maybe.

I've started my work in Computer Vision with classical algorithms (SIFT features, geometry, correlation filters and things alike people were researching for decades). These really worked like garbage, it was a nightmare.

Then we jumped on DL bandwagon - and CV just clicked for me. Now I see it working, not perfectly, not at human level yet, but it works, it's better than everything else and it certainly brings value - not just in CV! Maybe there will be some expectations delayed or even ruined (AGI, fully self-driving cars, dunno), but the tech isn't going anywhere.

At it requires at least some experience and a specific mindset, slightly unusual for a generic programmer. So I don't see a problem with experts, courses, degrees and the like.

Isn't this a bit premature? Mojo doesn't tangibly exist for most people (we can't run it ourselves), and I am unaware of any ML/ AI applications built with Mojo.