Scott Graves

Helping small to medium sized software companies scale up ⬆️ in my day job. Helping you on Twitter. AMA.

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

I’ve written code professionally since 1994. I’ve been a team lead. I’ve been a development director. I’ve been a CTO. I like to help. No question about software is too basic or too complex. I just want to share what I know.

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

@EHuanglu Slop. The people are uncanny. What was that Mario looking guy doing after the bus pulled up?

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

@Scobleizer @higgsfield_ai Wow that was AI slop

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

@zachlloydtweets Hook Claude up to your ide with the /ide command

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

@Grady_Booch Will Paramount’s hostile takeover attempt kill the whole deal? 🫢

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

Why isn’t AI getting the returns Big AI hoped for? We haven’t done the work yet. https://t.co/e9Rpfr1PQT

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

@tottinge ML applications are a different kind of software. Modern ML is truly a scientific breakthrough. You can create things with ML that weren’t possible before. The business value problem is about non knowing how to turn this tech into products.

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

@Grady_Booch This is a ludicrous claim.

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

@giffmana I hate when the paper title is a template for what they want the press to write.

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

@ylecun @ESYudkowsky @braneloop 10 years is still very soon for such a world changing technology! PS I appreciate FAIR publishing your work and releasing open source models.

[Pedro Domingos @pmddomingos]

Physicists think AI is physics.
Statisticians think AI is statistics.
Mathematicians think AI is mathematics.
Psychologists think AI is psychology.
Neuroscientists think AI is neuroscience.
And they’re all right.

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

@skdh If you feed an ML system observations about Nature, it can find patterns in the data. This is what physicists do. But, physicists are limited by the architecture of their brains. Is it physics if you invent better physicists?

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

@Grady_Booch Sure. But the thing is that we’ve learned so much about learning and reasoning in general from making LLMs that the next steps will be way easier.

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

@JeffGreason @peterrhague We can make anything well. We can make anything at scale. But we can’t make anything at scale well.

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

@Grady_Booch *All* of it? They are using cyberpunk as a cookbook and not a warning now.

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

@karpathy Did you say please?

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

@mosesjones @Grady_Booch @kimmonismus Well, those were humans 😊. As a technologist, I never say never. I keep Clarke’s Law firmly in mind.

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

@LeoIsTallish @etaaffe @Grady_Booch @kimmonismus I don’t think it will be mutually exclusive, I think it will compound. For example maybe language models will be the long term memory for a different kind of reasoning model. Maybe we are just using them to do too much. Billion dollar companies are grinding on reasoning.

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

@LeoIsTallish @etaaffe @Grady_Booch @kimmonismus I’m more in the Yann LeCun camp that we need a couple more breakthrough, not just incremental improvement to LLMs. I think we will find that the border between memory and reasoning is fuzzy and that LLMs are more like long term memory than generic reasoners.

[Scott Graves @ScaleTechScott]

@LeoIsTallish @etaaffe @Grady_Booch @kimmonismus It’s not magic because your mind is a natural object. You just have to imagine a system that can do all kinds of reasoning, not just about code. A market hypothesis’s is reasoning. A theory about what causes a bug is reasoning.