75
GPT-5, the world best model just 1 year ago, is today inferior to Qwen3.6 27B that you can run on your desktop (thelemmy.club)
submitted 2 months ago by to c/technology@hexbear.net
29 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 2 points 2 months ago (3 children)

There is no straw man, I pointed out that you draw an arbitrary line at technology you're familiar with. Nothing you've said here contradicts my point.

Also, you love making these sweeping statements like vibe code is slower and less resource efficient. Evidently you haven't actually seen most code that humans write, because boy would you be shocked then. What LLMs do however is allow people who have no coding skills to solve problems and automate things in a way they couldn't before unless they paid thousands of dollars to a developer. Meanwhile, these studies you reference use laughably small samples, but since they fit your narrative you choose to cite them uncritically as facts. And I'm not even going to touch your Reductio ad Hitlerum there.

The whole energy use argument is likewise hilarious given the context of this technology having become dramatically more efficient in just a single year. Not to mention that we were already building data centers for shit like bitcoing mining for decades. The actual problem here is capitalism but you're just fixating on how a particular technology is being abused under it instead of doing any sort of systemic analysis.

Honestly, if you used one, it might've come up with a more coherent argument.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    How is life qualitatively or quantitatively better now that we have access to these things? What were we all going without, for our entire lives, that is a noticeable net improvement, and that isn't swallowed up by increased demand and noise?

    It's one thing to make up rubrics and say that the models are scoring ever higher on them, while "the graph goes up and to the right". But on a practical level, what was so wrong or unbearable with the world before that introducing an LLM would revolutionize for the better? What software was so broken, or what process was so inaccessible, that the raw computational approach became the best solution? I'm actually open to hearing about this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    There are tons of ways LLMs have already improved daily life. Before LLMs, trying to translate a document required either hiring a translator or wrestling with clunky rule-based systems that often produced gibberish. Today, a model delivers usable translations in seconds. These might not be perfect, but they're far ahead of anything that was possible before. And these things are also helping people with disabilities, somebody with dyslexia or a blind professional had to wait days for accessible documents. Now, screen readers paired with LLMs can summarize, rephrase, and read aloud any PDF in real time. Researchers spent countless hours skimming through hundreds of pages of regulatory filings or legal opinions to find a single relevant clause. Now, they ask a question and have a machine find the answer with citations. These are just a few examples of genuine and cumulative improvements that free people from drudgery and lower barriers for those who were previously locked out.

    And here's a concrete illustration of how this tech can be used on the left to level the playing field allowing regular people to do what used to take a whole team of analysts before. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQog2g_zoJ8

    Examples of this tech being useful are only hard to find for people who choose to be aggressively ignorant on the subject.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •