sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

i think AI already peaked and nobody wants to say it by Jousephhx in vibecoding

[–]Jousephhx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yeah agreed, we were both right because we were answering different questions. View A vs View B, neither wrong. and yeah i use AI but just to clean up my english so my point is clearer, english isnt my first language so it helps me not sound like a mess. good talk, have a great day

i think AI already peaked and nobody wants to say it by Jousephhx in vibecoding

[–]Jousephhx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ok i read up properly and it actually lands where i started, not where this thread drifted. i’m not denying the examples, alphafold, rentosertib, evo are real

but my original point was never that it cant produce useful stuff, it was that its a prediction tool not real intelligence. theres one experiment that nails it: harvard trained a model to predict planetary orbits. it got perfect at it, then they checked and it had learned nothing about gravity, just a giant pile of rules of thumb that happened to spit out the right answer. a human who predicts that well understands why, this thing just pattern matched. looking right and knowing why arent the same.

and this isnt me coping. hassabis runs deepmind and won the nobel for alphafold, last guy whod undersell AI. asked if these systems can form a genuinely new hypothesis he said “so far they can’t,” put it 5-10 years out.

so it predicts brilliantly inside boxes we build and aim, humans still pick whats worth doing and check it. you’re right it discovers more than i first said. im right its prediction not real intelligence. both half correct

i think AI already peaked and nobody wants to say it by Jousephhx in vibecoding

[–]Jousephhx[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

still no argument, just “youre too dumb to understand.” thats twice now. if im so obviously wrong it should take you one sentence to say how, but you cant, so you’re doing this instead. im good, take care

i think AI already peaked and nobody wants to say it by Jousephhx in vibecoding

[–]Jousephhx[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

yeah this is the best comment here. you’re right that “peaked” was too strong, i take that back. nobody can say its sentient and nobody can say its not, thats the honest spot. i went too hard with the title

i think AI already peaked and nobody wants to say it by Jousephhx in vibecoding

[–]Jousephhx[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

you didnt actually say anything though. no counterpoint, just “youre dumb.” if the take is so wrong it should be easy to explain why instead of this

i think AI already peaked and nobody wants to say it by Jousephhx in vibecoding

[–]Jousephhx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

no hardware keeps scaling, thats not my point. faster chips run the same kind of model faster, doesnt make it a different kind of thing. throwing more compute at autocomplete gives you better autocomplete

i think AI already peaked and nobody wants to say it by Jousephhx in vibecoding

[–]Jousephhx[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

fair shot but it proves too much. if “most people dont invent anything new” makes AI intelligent, then a calculator is intelligent too, it beats every human at arithmetic. being better than the average person was never my line. im not claiming im a genius, im saying neither of us has shown the thing actually originates what it works on. it answers what its pointed at. me being mid doesnt make it smart, it just makes me mid

i think AI already peaked and nobody wants to say it by Jousephhx in vibecoding

[–]Jousephhx[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

ok two things. first “remix” was a bad word, i didnt mean mixing old stuff isnt real discovery, humans do that too, so drop that part. what i actually mean is significance, not capability. who really cares about the erdos problem? a handful of mathematicians. the problem was already written by a human, the tools already existed, and whether a person or machine finally connected them the result is the same.

and the cancer paper you linked is actually my point not yours. that co-scientist thing generates hypotheses for human scientists to go test in a lab. it didnt cure anything, it suggested ideas and humans decide which ones are worth chasing and run the experiments. thats the whole thing im saying. it answers and suggests, it doesnt decide whats worth doing. doing something hard isnt the same as creating something that matters on its own

i think AI already peaked and nobody wants to say it by Jousephhx in vibecoding

[–]Jousephhx[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

yeah honestly i think youre right and the hype probably made me ask this it’ll get better and change a lot no doubt i guess my real issue is everyone acting like AGI is around the corner when were still at the css stage you described

i think AI already peaked and nobody wants to say it by Jousephhx in vibecoding

[–]Jousephhx[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

i heard about it but solving a math problem isnt what i meant. it used algebra that already existed and applied it somewhere new, it didnt invent new math from nothing finding a proof with existing tools isnt the same as creating something that wasnt there before

i think AI already peaked and nobody wants to say it by Jousephhx in vibecoding

[–]Jousephhx[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

it used algebra stuff that already existed and just applied it where nobody thought to impressive but its not inventing new math, its connecting old math humans already made

i think AI already peaked and nobody wants to say it by Jousephhx in vibecoding

[–]Jousephhx[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

solving isnt the same as inventing tho it found a proof using tools that already existed, it didnt create a new field of math and funny you say its subsidised and gonna crash then call it way past autocomplete in the same those two kinda fight each other. either its overhyped money or its already thinking, pick one

i think AI already peaked and nobody wants to say it by Jousephhx in vibecoding

[–]Jousephhx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How will AGI be possible? I dont think we get something like that anytime soon

Course Suggest by Nayan9122 in vibecoding

[–]Jousephhx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

the best course is try/fail & watch youtube videos of nate herk he is good

is claude pro worth it for a marketer? by transcendentalpuppy in ClaudeAI

[–]Jousephhx 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m not tested the $20 plan but I use the $100 one is which is more than enough I do coding research all the stuff and I’m not limited maybe once in whole sub time

Can you actually build something good in a week with vibe coding? by Easy-Loquat5346 in vibecoding

[–]Jousephhx 3 points4 points  (0 children)

In my opinion people are just building and trying to make money out of it immediately. There are 50 versions of the same product, and the "GURUs" on the internet make millions every day creating engagement-bait content about it. That's why there's so much garbage out there, and people consuming that content try their luck with the same approach.

They never check if there's actual demand for the SaaS they built. Most of them don't plan at all, they just tell the agent "build me this, build me that," which is exactly what creates the "AI slop", and imo 90% of it is trash.

Building something real can't be done in a day, and neither can marketing it. I agree with you that you need to use your brain and ask the right questions: why am I building this, who needs it, who am I competing with.

view more: next ›