Which studies? [edit: I'll assume you mean these two given by @dorolow: https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.01413 https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.07515]

> It can't be used as the -only- data source of course, but that's not how it is being used

Right, so human data creation would also have to scale up exponentially, and that's not gonna happen.

> because there's no difference between synthetic data and the data people can create

I mean, that's obviously false, otherwise model collapse wouldn't exist. The difference is statistical, but it's there.

> It is accelerating how quickly researchers and engineers can do their jobs. > https://news.mit.edu/2026/ai-helps-design-new-materials-that...

That's pretty clearly a hype article, the headline even says "The CrysVCD tool developed at MIT COULD cut the huge amounts of time and money spent". I'm asking for empirical measurements of timelines, not hypotheticals.

> This is only the beginning, too... Look ahead a year or two.

Lol that excuse is getting really old

No it can't? Every time the labs try this we see model collapse, e.g. shoving goblins into every conversation.

And I have seen zero evidence that AI is accelerating materials science in any meaningful way, let alone photonic computing.

Plus, we have no real reason to think LLMs are anywhere close to AGI or ASI. So arguments like these are just distracting from the very real, very present danger that LLMs pose: information breakdown, societal collapse and environmental destruction. In other words, this is criti-hype.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49153574

Points: 4

# Comments: 2

https://www.newsweek.com/map-data-centers-built-drought-hit-...

I avoid this stuff as much as I can without upending my life, and I'm still forking over much of my spending to companies that can pollute my land, water, and air with near impunity. I didn't choose this shit!

No. Or rather, I wish it happened very differently, and much slower. The rush to make every new city and development "car-friendly" had negative consequences that will last centuries. That's why my city isn't walkable and has awful public transportation, and biking is a recipe for disaster. Not to mention the insidious environmental and health effects!

Of course cars have their place in efficient modern transportation, but we would live in a much better world if their development and integration had been slower, more carefully considered, and more criticized.

But the short-term impacts here and now are really, really bad. People are getting hurt (through water consumption, vibe-coded security disasters, IP theft, data center pollution, loss of job security and therefore healthcare in the US, LLM psychosis, inability to find reliable information, etc.) We're not actually obligated to sacrifice these people on the altar of "progress". We can slow down! When our society is capable of even somewhat protecting us from these harms, then maybe I'll stop being an LLM hater.