I think the gap is because 1. For coding, Claude is amazing - mainly because of its curated skills and because massive amounts of working code has already been carefully labeled over the last decade or so via GitHub. And because with any Turing complete language, there is only so much one can do.

But 2. For most other things, LLMs are fairly underwhelming. Research is usually mediocre. Try being rigorous and repeat your research prompt many times - then make a confusion matrix to tally up how many false positives and false negatives occur. And for the rest, be honest and ask yourself if the LLM is doing much more than a basic search engine query or trip to Wikipedia would have told you. For “normie” use cases, it’s handy-ish but far from revolutionary

What other industry regularly acts in such bad faith with respect to claims made? In the securities industry, material misstatement of fact lands people in jail.

Tech is supposed to be a tool that serves other products ends, not an end in itself.

At this point, tech biz leaders are massively over-reaching and trying to influence the rest of us: muxk, thiel, Karp, etc.

So it should be no surprise that the rest of us are ready, willing and able to push back just as hard.

tech biz leads should just run their companies and stop trying to play president or god

"At this point, tech biz leaders are massively over-reaching and trying to influence the rest of us:"

I realize this is what's happening on the headlines, but most of the technology being "deployed" is back-office automation, robotics etc. that no one writes about and none of the tech baddies have monopolistic control over. I refuse to let muxk, thiel, Karp to run the conversation and setup the reaction either. It is exciting and dramatic but not necessarily influential.

Gee, what an optimistic outlook you have. Do you think the truly creative innovators in the fields of tech, science, engineering, and art get out of bed in the morning believing that they are just grimly marching down a path laid out by someone else? While OP’s philosophy may be a bit rosy, it sure leads to better outcomes than dark fatalism.

Wearables are creepy. Please stop pushing “products” that nobody wants.

The scary part is, some people do want them. And from that, they will just keep getting advertised and pushed onto customers anyway.

Forecasts are a thought exercise, not the revelation of something foretold. Best thing to do is think of the outcome you wish for and then try to take whatever actions you can to help make it so. Like with climate change for example.

It can be both. In the field of high-technology (like semiconductor) manufacturing, the techinques of making chips with feature sizes many generations ahead of current SOTA exist in various states of completion, so extrapolation can be made from that.

But what's going on in here is not that - it's reading tea leaves for maximum dramatic effect.

1. so is everyone who is subject to a corporate mandate... but...

2. this may be ok. A good way to learn a piece of software or tool or process is to play with it. We learn lots of general knowledge through play and experimentation. Heck we get better at musical instruments by playing on them.

Mandates are kind of dumb in many ways. But they will force the issue of discovering whether anything useful can come from AI other than coding.

Carpet has been made for millennia. Scotchguard is new and toxic. So just make the carpets without the stain protection junk.

Frankly the carpet factories will do more business as people will want to replace their carpets more frequently.

Both try to maximize engagement. Both (soon to be) ad supported. Both driven by algorithms that show the user what they want to see.

Like dot matrix printer fonts