Moltbook is proof that GenAI was a scam
8 pointsby cadabrabra5 hours ago4 comments
  • verdverm5 hours ago
    You seem to be on a streak of making rant posts about Ai on HN

    https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=cadabrabra

    Your opinion is in the minority here now because many of us have overwhelmingly positive experience with agents

    Moltbook is not the proof you are looking for. I agree it's dumb af, but it's a novelty in a hype cycle. We won't be talking about it in a few months

    You won't find proof because there is not enough research and the field is evolving faster than the research on outcomes paper pipeline can process.

    • codingdave5 hours ago
      There is nothing wrong with being in the minority opinion. Sometimes that is where good insights come from, but even if not, we don't need to encourage tunnel vision in the opinions here.

      But I agree that the pace of the postings is a little much.

      • minimaxir5 hours ago
        The more applicable forum term-of-art is "single purpose poster", which is fine if they have a niche they excel in and can offer unique insight as a result, but that's not what's happening here.
    • ksaj3 hours ago
      He's at the stage where "The internet is just a passing phase" with a whole lot of narrow points proving how useless it all is.
    • cadabrabra5 hours ago
      Glad you agree about Moltbook. We can leave it at that, we don’t have to agree on everything.
  • mohsen15 hours ago
    > You’d have thought that GenAI would replace engineers

    Trust me, it has replaced software engineers in many places. I don't hear anyone hiring junior software engineers around me

    • cadabrabra5 hours ago
      That’s because we’re in a recession. It has nothing to do with AI. AI can’t replace a god damn drive thru worker. McDonald’s literally tried and failed, that’s the funny part.
      • ksaj3 hours ago
        Weird. Most of the MacDonald's where I live use AI. And they're not the only ones. Doesn't seem like they failed.

        MacDonald's is always trying "new" things intermittently in different markets. Removal from one market doesn't equal failure or permanence.

        Most of the failures are a direct result of people intentionally trying to make it fail. Ordering a gazillion big macs and then replacing a third of them with egg mcmuffins is hardly something people would normally wish to do. Discoveries, like its inability to work with fractional food orders, are total nonsense since literally nobody orders food that way, unless they're trying to get lulz for their social accounts.

  • marysminefnuf2 hours ago
    the math behind ai models to me makes it seem like a magic trick so I agree. I mean like even the circular dealmaking proves there isnt any math behind ai. if it was really more than a magic trick then the amount of energy put into it would have amounted to more incredible things. ai just isnt scaling.
  • ksaj3 hours ago
    "...all we have to show" and then you limit it to only one intentionally bizarre spectacle of use. You've absolutely ignored an entire industry save for a single bullet point about a single web page you clearly didn't like.

    Did you forget about graphics? Did you forget about music? Did you forget about code? Did you forget about home automation? Did you forget about translations? Did you forget about proofreading? Did you forget about summarization? Did you forget about data aggregation and analysis? Did you forget about industrial robots? Etc.

    Your conclusion is so cherry picked it is meaningless.