Discussion
Loading...

Post

  • About
  • Code of conduct
  • Privacy
  • Users
  • Instances
  • About Bonfire
David Gerard
@davidgerard@circumstances.run  ·  activity timestamp 5 hours ago

The key weakness in AI agents is that they're a lie. They don't work. They just don't fuckin' work. You can't set a hallucination engine to work doing tasks. It's pants on head stupid. The hype pretends this isn't the case and hypothesises a fabulous future where they work *at all*. This is a lie.

A useful model for "AI agents" is that they're the current excuse meme for AI. They're not a thing that works at all, now or in the fabulous future. But they're *such* good material for hypecrafting. No sausage at all, but *my god* that sizzle.

  • Copy link
  • Flag this post
  • Block
Dibs
@dtwx@mastodon.social replied  ·  activity timestamp 2 hours ago

@davidgerard I have multiple examples of Copilot failing to provide accurate information about MS products, which, apparently, Copilot can configure FOR you!

How's that possible?

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
gigantos
@gigantos@social.linux.pizza replied  ·  activity timestamp 2 hours ago

@davidgerard I don’t know what you base this on. It most definitely work for some things, at least some of the time.

For example, someone I know needed to do some stuff with an Arduino to make it show a pretty wave pattern using unevenly distributed led lights. This person was a crafter, not a coder. However, by oploading a hand drawn picture of where the leds where placed it generated a web based simulator with sliders to tweak parameters. Then, when he was happy with the result after tuning the sliders, it generated code for the arduino that compiled and ran perfectly. First try.

It might have been an incredible amount of luck, but this non-technical person got his art project to work without needing to learn anything about code.

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
DistroWatch
@distrowatch@mastodon.social replied  ·  activity timestamp 3 hours ago

@davidgerard "You can't set a hallucination engine to work doing tasks."

You can if your goal is to produce a lot of material that is not correct, or it doesn't matter if the material is correct.

I think that is what people tend to miss about the drive to get AI into the world. The people pushing it don't care if it's accurate, it might even be better for them if it's not, they just want a lot of material that looks passable to some people. They want filler and propaganda and misinformation.

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
DistroWatch
@distrowatch@mastodon.social replied  ·  activity timestamp 3 hours ago

@davidgerard So when you say "they don't work", keep in mind that AI _does_ work as intended. AI agents just aren't very useful for most people. Those statements are contradictions, they're a sign of for whom AI works.

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
mossman
@mossman@social.vivaldi.net replied  ·  activity timestamp 3 hours ago

@davidgerard that reminds me... I have to do my company's mandatory agentic AI training course this week... wish me luck 🤮

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
Skjeggtroll
@skjeggtroll@mastodon.online replied  ·  activity timestamp 3 hours ago

@davidgerard

Software Agents never made much sense. In order for people to trust them to act on their behalf the task they do have to be so well defined that for all practical purposes it'd better to just automate it.

"AI Agents" make even less sense. Has anyone even suggested one that's more than just an automation wrapper around a sequence of LLM calls and service APIs?

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
David Chisnall (*Now with 50% more sarcasm!*)
@david_chisnall@infosec.exchange replied  ·  activity timestamp 4 hours ago

@davidgerard

The use case for 'agents' isn't that they do useful things unattended, it's that they can consume (billed for) tokens unattended.

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
Artemis
@art_codesmith@toot.cafe replied  ·  activity timestamp 4 hours ago

@davidgerard Maybe I'm misunderstanding something, but for what I understood, it's basically the same LLM stuff but in the background?
Basically, if you roll the dice enough times, you might get something that passes all the unit tests?
(And burn a whole bunch of tokens in the process...)

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
David Gerard
@davidgerard@circumstances.run replied  ·  activity timestamp 4 hours ago

@art_codesmith you say "do a thing" and it goes and does the thing! Or what it hallucinates as the thing. This turns out to have a disastrously high failure rate. Also, it's hilariously easy to prompt-inject.

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
Jonathan Hendry
@jonhendry@iosdev.space replied  ·  activity timestamp 5 hours ago

@davidgerard

People who were losing patience are like “ah, agents, now we’ll surely get what we were promised!” And then it takes a few months or a year for them to figure out, nope it still doesn’t work. By which time the AI grifters will have another silver bullet to pitch.

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
Androcat
@androcat@toot.cat replied  ·  activity timestamp 5 hours ago

@davidgerard

But say this to the believers and they respond "It simply isn't credible to criticize this technology without acknowledging that it is useful to many people"...

As if they get to demand that we believe the lie when we criticize the lie.

The only thing we gotta acknowledge is that many people are utter tools who want to be lied to.

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
Log in

bonfire.cafe

A space for Bonfire maintainers and contributors to communicate

bonfire.cafe: About · Code of conduct · Privacy · Users · Instances
Bonfire social · 1.0.0 no JS en
Automatic federation enabled
  • Explore
  • About
  • Members
  • Code of Conduct
Home
Login