all 34 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 61 points 1 week ago (1 child)

Not surprising.

Their solution to everything LLM has been to add intermediary LLMs to manage the one we interact with to add "guardrails" or point them to a calculator.

It shouldn't be surprising that they utterly fail at basic tasks on their own.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 53 points 1 week ago

    Fermi paradox was really referring to intelligence eventually creating a paralyzing bureaucracy.

    Lol

  • source
  • [–] [S] 184 points 1 week ago (17 children)

    Four AIs spent 11 minutes deciding who was authorized to fertilize one wheat block. At that point, I’m not sure the experiment failed. They recreated middle management with no humans involved. Give them another hour and they’ll require a quarterly performance review from the wheat.

  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 116 points 1 week ago (6 children)

    yet another proof that middle managers aren't sentient

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 56 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    My manager keeps me from having to deal with politics, shifting priorities, and tells me what I need to do to deal with the endless morass of corporate bureaucracy. He’s worth every cent.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 week ago

    Yeah, that can be tricky. Under a previous manager where mostly he was ignored and I worked straight with the middle management, I had gotten the hang of the people inflicting the politics and crap and was significantly able to directly counter it to avoid spurious bullshit.

    Then when that manager got laid off, and I got a new "I'll shield you" manager, who largely just takes whatever crap he's told and passes it on and says it's better to just take it than risk making waves. So I end up having to waste more time than I used to.

    But absolutely was valuable in an early manager who took on the politics direct while I just did my work in early career. Of course he got fired for keeping documentation on a certain executive making a terrible call and actually sharing it with the senior leadership team when that terrible call went bad. Senior executives canned the executive, but let him fire the manager on the way out. Guess if there's one thing worse than an executive incurring risk, it's a snitch.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 week ago

    Problem being, lots of middle managers got the job via The Peter Principal. My last boss landed the role that way. He's an astonishing devops guy and one of the 5 smartest humans I've ever known, but he cannot manage people.

    Quit my job at Lowe's when it became apparent the regional theft prevention manager hated me. GM passed me in the store and said I better watch it with her as he couldn't protect me. Loved the three guys above me, but I was out a couple of hours after hearing that.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    And replaceable.

    What would you say you do here?

    I take directives from the CEO and board and deliver them to the goddamn employees, so they don't have to deal with them. I have people skills, dammit!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (4 children)

    They should try again after they fix the problems. Though i wonder if they even understand what the problem was or are they "allowed" to fix it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    It's pretty clear to me that the problem is that the division of labor wasn't clearly defined. This seems like a management issue.

    Like, with 50 players, you can make 5 teams of ten. Assign one team to mining, one to woodcutting, one to crafting, one to building, and one to food production.

    Then within each team, give each one a zone to focus on. Each crafter gets a workshop, each fooder gets a field or some coastline. Two or three different mining locations and you can assign each miner a cardinal direction for their main shaft. The woodcutters can replant the trees as they go, so each one only needs a moderate sized area.

    Then the builders can be divided into categories. Maybe 4 on wall duty, 4 on buildings, 2 on paths and lights.

    Or better yet make it only 5 woodcutters, 5 crafters, and 5 food producers. Then you have 15 extra players and you can set 10 of those to act as guards to protect the others from monsters, and 5 as runners to carry materials from the mines, groves, farms, etc., to the town, and carry replacement tools, supplies, food, etc. back to the stations.

    Once the structures are complete, the builders can join the other teams. Eventually when you add stuff like enchanting and brewing there will be more roles, like hunting monsters for exp, or fighting blazes for their powder.

    But yeah for early game, it seems like a simple solution, and the answer is proper delegation instead of a free-for-all.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    But yeah for early game, it seems like a simple solution, and the answer is proper delegation instead of a free-for-all.

    That's the problem. Humans would each gravitate to what they do best and organise themselves into a structure relatively quickly.

    LLMs get stuck in circular patterns because they don't have the ability to do that. They can't think outside the box. None of them arbitrarily becomes the boss to take charge. They're all yes men stuck in endless board meetings where even just flipping a coin would break the deadlock. But they are incapable of realising that, because they are just statistical regurgitation machines flavoured with a bit of randomness on the most probable outputs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago*

    I think the point of having something that should be able to do stuff autonomously, is that it should be able to define these things by itself. Or at least the value of it would be in it being able to do it. But would giving up control be what the ones in control want to do? I wonder if that is also one of the things that keeps the corporations from getting any closer to more functional llm that isnt just a brainless yesman.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    What do you mean "no humans involved"? The LLMs are statistical models trained on humans (and their behaviours) and so obviously the outcome is a representation of exactly that. They're just worse at it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 27 points 1 week ago

    Sounds like LLM is a good fit for replacing management layers now then.

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 1 week ago

    "I learned it from you, Dad!"

    • LLM agent trained on human data where we solve our problems with either beaurocracy or violence.
  • source
  • [–] 14 points 1 week ago

    Oh. Just like real life.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 1 week ago (6 children)

    Are we training the Matrix now?

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (2 children)

    That’s how humanity lives on forever. The Matrix had them using us for power, but they won’t need us meat bags at all, really.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 child)

    Fun fact, early scripts for the original film had Humanity plugged in to share computational processing Power for the Machines, but the studios didn't believe audiences could grasp that so it was changed to providing electricity.

    Which is impossible, the whole feeding cycle for harvesting us as batteries would yield less power than just using the feed source for power.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 6 points 1 week ago
    [–] 4 points 1 week ago

    Lobotomize all the parts that make a person free, raise someone with an HR mommy, then force them to do stuff under duress, and this is exactly what you get, white bread middle management indecisive apologetic unimaginative boring bland banality.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 week ago

    They have pretty rigorous reinforcement training on most models, that will actively seek out ways to prolong and cause more short term engagement, which makes them useless as a team.

  • source