LLMs are already better than humans at math and cybersecurity, since around spring this year. If you are a human in those fields, you’re worse, period. I’m not sure why you’d just to around blatantly lying about things you clearly don’t understand.
Well it’s impossible to lie about something you don’t understand, that’s just called being wrong. And I may be. But I’d argue that while AI has solved notable math problems and created notable security patches and hacks it is not actually “better” than all humans at those things; and I’d be astounded if someone who had actual expertise, which your comment shows no proof of, agreed with you.
How is it not better if it can do things humans can’t? OpenAI just solved another 100 problems no human could solve. Mythos finds decades-old vulnerabilities in common software on the regular. What can humans do better? You don’t have to be an expert to see where this is going. The entire field of math is basically in a panic right now, signing petitions left and right to try and stop AI from killing their field. Cybersecurity only fares better because not every company is allowed to use mythos and a big part of the job is security training for employees.
I keep hearing this but what makes them “good”? Like at the end of the day they’re still just LLMs right? Even if they can generate a perfect picture that no human could tell is AI, so what? What is that skill useful for besides fooling humans into believing something is real that isn’t true?
Heck- they can’t even set a reminder like natural language processing (Siri) could do fifteen years ago.
Where I work it has become standard to use these tools. Being dismissive of it’s capabilities is a ship that sailed 2 years ago, and unfortunately it will only get more powerful.
I hate it though and wish we could put all this back into Pandora’s box.
I know you think they’re good, I asked what makes them good. Maybe you can you give an example of what makes them good? It might help me understand your perspective.
Theres a really interesting episode of the podcast “diary of s ceo” with the guest Ed Zitron. He says a lot about how we can see some really good uses for AI but not trillions of dollars worth of use. Billions, maybe, but trillions? Personally, im wondering if this is a way for the uber rich to suck as much money out of the rich before the economy collapses.
The investment speculation angle really does feel like crypto 2.0. Blockchain tech has some interesting, though niche right now, uses.
I’m with Ed I absolutely don’t think LLMs are worthless but anyone who thinks a critical mass of real people want to pay real dollars for slop are living a fantasy.
I asked Claude to help me create a website. IMHO the one it built (with some back and forth) was way better than websites I have paid professionals to build.
Furthermore, it showed me how to get it hosted for free.
It created programs that keep it updated that do not involve using Claude.
I currently have a step where I am involved in the updates, but once I have confidence that it can properly handle edge cases I will have it completely automate the process.
I think you’re misunderstanding my question, I’m not saying LLMs can’t spit out a website so perfectly convincing that it would be impossible to discern from a human made website.
I’m asking what makes speeding up the creation of such “slop-sites” useful or desirable to anyone?
EDIT: Maybe you could sell me on why automating undergraduate work is something interesting or helpful?
Man, every time I ask someone what makes LLMs useful I get weird rambling defensiveness.
I don’t understand how “automated production of websites that can fool you into believing a person made them” is helpful or interesting or valuable to anyone but propogandists and scammers.
Dude, you are talking about 8 months ago. The versions you pay for are really good.
Seriously
They’re good at things you’re not good at. If you’re good at something, and you see them try to do it, they’re shite.
yeah, they’re not even that good
Right? But also even perfectly made slop is still slop. Slop is nothing new it’s just getting automated
LLMs are already better than humans at math and cybersecurity, since around spring this year. If you are a human in those fields, you’re worse, period. I’m not sure why you’d just to around blatantly lying about things you clearly don’t understand.
Well it’s impossible to lie about something you don’t understand, that’s just called being wrong. And I may be. But I’d argue that while AI has solved notable math problems and created notable security patches and hacks it is not actually “better” than all humans at those things; and I’d be astounded if someone who had actual expertise, which your comment shows no proof of, agreed with you.
How is it not better if it can do things humans can’t? OpenAI just solved another 100 problems no human could solve. Mythos finds decades-old vulnerabilities in common software on the regular. What can humans do better? You don’t have to be an expert to see where this is going. The entire field of math is basically in a panic right now, signing petitions left and right to try and stop AI from killing their field. Cybersecurity only fares better because not every company is allowed to use mythos and a big part of the job is security training for employees.
A boat can do things humans can’t. Are boats better than all humans?
At those things, absolutely. Nobody remotely sane would deny that.
I keep hearing this but what makes them “good”? Like at the end of the day they’re still just LLMs right? Even if they can generate a perfect picture that no human could tell is AI, so what? What is that skill useful for besides fooling humans into believing something is real that isn’t true?
Heck- they can’t even set a reminder like natural language processing (Siri) could do fifteen years ago.
Where I work it has become standard to use these tools. Being dismissive of it’s capabilities is a ship that sailed 2 years ago, and unfortunately it will only get more powerful.
I hate it though and wish we could put all this back into Pandora’s box.
I know you think they’re good, I asked what makes them good. Maybe you can you give an example of what makes them good? It might help me understand your perspective.
Theres a really interesting episode of the podcast “diary of s ceo” with the guest Ed Zitron. He says a lot about how we can see some really good uses for AI but not trillions of dollars worth of use. Billions, maybe, but trillions? Personally, im wondering if this is a way for the uber rich to suck as much money out of the rich before the economy collapses.
The investment speculation angle really does feel like crypto 2.0. Blockchain tech has some interesting, though niche right now, uses.
I’m with Ed I absolutely don’t think LLMs are worthless but anyone who thinks a critical mass of real people want to pay real dollars for slop are living a fantasy.
For instance:
I asked Claude to help me create a website. IMHO the one it built (with some back and forth) was way better than websites I have paid professionals to build.
Furthermore, it showed me how to get it hosted for free.
It created programs that keep it updated that do not involve using Claude.
I currently have a step where I am involved in the updates, but once I have confidence that it can properly handle edge cases I will have it completely automate the process.
Siri cannot do that.
MIT says AI can credibly do undergraduate work
https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2026/08/25/ai-can-now-credibly-complete-most-undergraduate-assignments-mit-warns/
People keep piling into the copium but they should be paying attention.
I think you’re misunderstanding my question, I’m not saying LLMs can’t spit out a website so perfectly convincing that it would be impossible to discern from a human made website.
I’m asking what makes speeding up the creation of such “slop-sites” useful or desirable to anyone?
EDIT: Maybe you could sell me on why automating undergraduate work is something interesting or helpful?
My example was to refute the prior comments
Thanks for knowing that my website is slop having not seen it
Man, every time I ask someone what makes LLMs useful I get weird rambling defensiveness.
I don’t understand how “automated production of websites that can fool you into believing a person made them” is helpful or interesting or valuable to anyone but propogandists and scammers.
Enjoy the copium
Thanks for trying to explain but I honestly just left more confused.