How I keep up with AI progress
81 comments
·July 18, 2025lsy
crystal_revenge
I strongly agree with this sentiment and found the blog's list of "high signal" to be more a list of "self-promoting" (some good people who I've interacted with a fair bit on there, but that list is more 'buzz' than insight).
I also have not experienced the post's claim that: "Generative AI has been the fastest moving technology I have seen in my lifetime." I can't speak for the author, but I've been in this field from when "SVMs are the new hotness and neural networks are a joke!" to the entire explosion of deep learning, and insane number of DL frameworks around the 20-teens, all within a decade (remember implementing restricted Boltzmann machines and pre-training?). Similarly I saw "don't use JS for anything other than enhancing the UX" to single page webapps being the standard in the same timeframe.
Unless someone's aim is to be on that list of "High signal" people, it's far better to just keep your head down until you actually need these solutions. As an example, I left webdev work around the time of backbone.js, one of the first attempts at front end MVC for single pages apps. Then the great React/Angular wars began, and I just ignored it. A decade later I was working with a webdev team and learned React in a few days, very glad I did not stress about "keeping up" during the period of non-stop changing. Another example is just 5 years ago everyone was trying to learn how to implement LSTMs from scratch... only to have that model essentially become obsolete with the rise of transformers.
Multiple times over my career I've learned lesson that moving fast is another way of saying immature. One would find more success learning about the GLM (or god forbid understanding to identify survival analysis problems) and all of it's still under appreciated uses for day-to-day problem solving (old does not imply obsolete) than learning the "prompt hack of the week".
thorum
Beyond a basic understanding of how LLMs work, I find most LLM news fits into one of these categories:
- Someone made a slightly different tool for using LLMs (may or may not be useful depending on whether existing tools meet your needs)
- Someone made a model that is incrementally better at something, beating the previous state-of-the-art by a few % points on one benchmark or another (interesting to keep an eye on, but remember that this happens all the time and this new model will be outdated in a few months - probably no one will care about Kimi-K2 or GPT 4.1 by next January)
I think most people can comfortably ignore that kind of news and it wouldn’t matter.
On the other hand, some LLM news is:
- Someone figured out how to give a model entirely new capabilities.
Examples: RL and chain of thought. Coding agents that actually sort of work now. Computer Use. True end-to-end multimodal modals. Intelligent tool use.
Most people probably should be paying attention to those developments (and trying to look forward to what’s coming next). But the big capability leaps are rare and exciting enough that a cursory skim of HN posts with >500 points should keep you up-to-date.
I’d argue that, as with other tech skills, the best way to develop your understanding of LLMs and their capabilities is not through blogs or videos etc. It’s to build something. Experience for yourself what the tools are capable of, what does and doesn’t work, what is directly useful to your own work, etc.
PaulHoule
Rewritten in response to quality complaint.
A lot of people are feeling HN is saturated with AI posts whether it is how MCP is like USB-C (repeated so much you know it is NPCs) or how outraged people are that their sh1t fanfics are being hoovered up to train AI.
This piece is not “news”, it’s a summary which is tepid at best, I wish people had some better judgement about what they vote up.
Fraterkes
Just a heads up: you should try to get better at writing.
alphazard
When explaining LLMs to people, often the high level architecture is what they find the most interesting. Not the transformer, but the token by token prediction strategy (autoregression), and not always choosing the most likely token, but a token proportional to its likelihood.
The minutiae of how next token prediction works is rarely appreciated by lay people. They don't care about dot products, or embeddings, or any of it. There's basically no advantage to explaining how that part works since most people won't understand, retain, or appreciate it.
victorbjorklund
Indeed. We have just had a few really big shifts since launch of GPT3. Rest has just been bigger and more optimized models + tooling around the models.
panarchy
AI research was so interesting pre-transformers it was starting to get a bit wild around GPT2 IIRC but now the signal to noise is so low with every internet sensationalist and dumb MBA jumping on the bandwagon.
helloplanets
It's not a model of text, though. It's a model of multiple types of data. Pretty much all modern models are multimodal.
qsort
I agree, but with the caveat that it's probably a bad time to fall asleep at the wheel. I'm very much a "nothing ever happens" kind of guy, but I see a lot of people who aren't taking the time to actually understand how LLMs work, and I think that's a huge mistake.
Last week I showed some colleagues how to do some basic things with Claude Code and they were like "wow, I didn't even know this existed". Bro, what are you even doing.
There is definitely a lot of hype and the lunatics on Linkedin are having a blast, but to put it mildly I don't think it's a bad investment to experiment a bit with what's possible with the SOTA.
layer8
> the lunatics on Linkedin are having a blast
That’s a nice way to put it, made me chuckle. :)
crystal_revenge
> I see a lot of people who aren't taking the time to actually understand how LLMs work
The trouble is that the advice in the post will have very little impact on "understanding how LLMs work". The number of people who talk about LLMs daily but have never run an LLM local, and certainly never "opened it up to mess around" is very large.
A fun weekend exercise that anyone can do is to implement speculative decoding[0] using local LLMs. You'll learn a lot more about how LLMs work than reading every blog/twitter stream mentioned there.
0. https://research.google/blog/looking-back-at-speculative-dec...
chamomeal
I mean I didn’t find out about Claude code until like a week ago and it hasn’t materially changed my work, or even how I interact with LLMs. I still basically copy paste into claude on web most of the time.
It is ridiculously cool, but I think anybody developer who is out of the loop could easily get back into the loop at any moment without having to stay caught up most of the time.
qsort
I'm not talking about tools in particular, I completely agree that they're basically fungible, and for "serious" stuff it's probably still better to use the web interface directly as you have more control over the context.
The problem I see is that a lot of people are grossly misaligned with the state of the art, and it does take a bit of experimentation to understand how to work with an LLM. Even basic stuff like how to work with context isn't immediately obvious.
rglover
You don't need to "keep up," you just need to loosely pay attention to identify things/features that will make you more productive, test them out, and keep what actually works (not what some influencer claims to work on social media). In fact, I feel far more confident in my understanding by listening to researchers who dismiss the wild claims about AI's potential—not hype it blindly [1].
There's far too much noise, churn, and indecision at this stage to get any productive value out of riding the bleeding edge.
If it's actually revolutionary, you'll hear about it on HN.
phyzome
The article doesn't actually explain the "why", which severely undercuts the existence of the "how" list.
It's fine to go do other things with your precious time instead.
pizzathyme
Exactly. I have been questioning the need to "keep up". As the best AI innovations arrive, the ones that are useful will eventually make their way to the mainstream (and me). I didn't "keep up" with the nascent development of spreadsheets or Google Docs. Once they were widely used, I adopted them just fine, and haven't missed out on anything.
Unless you are building an AI startup furiously searching for PMF before your runway expires, I don't see the urgency.
gowld
Someone who keeps up on AI and finds productivity gains will outcompete someone who doesn't, even for activities that aren't develoing new AI weren't AI-based before.
What is an "AI startup"? If you add a chatbot do your product, are you an "AI startup"? Does "startup" require having no moat? Can you be an established stable business that loses everything to a startup that leapfrogs your tech, AltaVista?
pamelafox
Great list! I also subscribe to Gergeley Orosz' "Pragmatic Engineer" which covers many AI topics now, and to Gary Marcus' substack, which tackles topics more from an LLM skeptic perspective.
https://newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/ https://substack.com/@garymarcus
Plus I subscribe to updates from Python packages like Langchain and PydanticAI to see what they're up to, since that's usually reflective of what's happening in broader industry.
I'm not on X anymore so I can't follow many of the folks directly, but some of them (like Simon Willison) also post on BlueSky and Mastodon, fortunately. Some folks like Sebastian Raschka and Chip Huyen also post on LinkedIn. Kind of all over, but eventually, I see a good amount of what's happening.
jameslk
Maybe I’ve been missing some important stuff, but it seems the most relevant and important updates eventually just bubble up to the front page of HN or get mentioned in the comments
SoftTalker
Trying to keep up is like jumping on a 90mph treadmill. I have decided to opt out. I think AI (and currently LLMs) is more than a fad and not going away but it's in a huge state of churn right now. I'm not investing a ton of time into anything until I have to. In another few years the landscape will hopefully be more clear. Or not, but at least I won't have spent a lot of time on stuff that has quickly become irrelevant.
I'm currently not using AI or LLMs in any of my day-to-day work.
bluefirebrand
I agree pretty strongly
Yeah it's not a fad, but I think it's really not as useful to me right now as the hype seems to suggest
I'm going to keep an eye on developments, but I'm not using it for my day to day either. I'm just not seeing the same value other people seem to be seeing right now and I'm not going to exhaust myself trying to keep up
One day Claude is the best. Next is Cursor. People are switching tools every two weeks trying to keep up
Not for me thanks. Especially not with how inconsistent the quality and output still are
chasd00
i'm in the same boat, i did the zero-to-hero series karpathy put out to get a basic understanding of what we're dealing with. At work, I helped put together a basic rag setup last year that's in production so feel ok with implementation. Finally, i have a little personal pet project that i'm going to feel out with claude code over Christmas to get more hands on. That's about it all i'm going to do to "keep up". I'll let the fighters fight it out and then just use whatever wins.
btw here's a link to the karpathy videos https://karpathy.ai/zero-to-hero.html
edit: i use claude and chatgpt day to day to help with simple things like regex, a replacement for google search in same cases, and self contained classes, functions, and other small discreet blocks of code.
HellDunkel
This. When has early adoptation paid off lately? Remember prompt engineering?
twelve40
what do you mean remember? it didn't go anywhere. I try to understand how to make this useful for my daily programming, and every credible-looking advice begins with "tell LLM to program in style ABC and avoid antipatterns like XYZ", sometimes pages and pages long. It seems like without this prompt sourcery you cannot produce good code using an LLM it will make the same stupid mistakes over and over unless you try to pre-empt them with a carefully engineered upfront prompt. Aside from stupid "influencers" who bullshit that they produced a live commercial app with a one-liner English sentence, it seems that getting anything useful really requires a lot of prompt work, whatever you want to call it.
Disposal8433
I remember the same FOMO that happened with "Google searching." People wrote and sold books about how to search properly on Google. The same with AI will happen: either it will flop, or we'll be able to learn all the needed skills in a few days. I don't worry about it.
bzmrgonz
give me whisper real-time transcriber and I'll be happy!!
roboror
Yeah these companies have made unbelievable investments, keeping their products a secret is antithetical to their existence.
mettamage
This is my attitude for all tech surrounding IT
blactuary
Actually no I do not have to keep up
mertleee
Yeah. Time to do something else.
paul7986
Indeed just get out of tech and make a new living! Tech jobs are declining and will continue then fall off a cliff with one doing the job ten use to. Followed by other white collar and blue collar (AMazons warehouse robots) jobs.
Happily canceled my GPT Plus this week; personally not gonna feed that beast any longer! As well it can not generate maps (create road trip travel maps showing distance between locations to share with friends, a creek tubing map route & etc) at all like Gemini can for free.
astrange
> Tech jobs are declining and will continue then fall off a cliff with one doing the job ten use to.
This would increase employment ceteris paribus. That's like saying inventing new programming languages is bad because they're too productive.
kybernetikos
>> one doing the job ten use to.
> This would increase employment ceteris paribus.
This might be true, but if it is, the one "doing the job ten use[d] to" would not actually being doing the same kind of work at all, and so therefore might not be the same people or even same kind of people. Even if we do Jevons ourselves out of this situation, it might still spell employment disaster for mid level coders, while increasing employment for product managers.
dingnuts
That's right, there are no carpenters or lumberjacks anymore because power tools were invented
kybernetikos
There are lots of careers that used to be widespread but are now extremely niche because of technological change. For example, most careers relating to horses.
paul7986
So say you are a startup are you going to now hire a designer or use WAY Less Expensive & quicker AI to design logos, website, an app, etc? Print design.. all types of design it can do.
So You and all other people like to save money are going to continue spend the same thousands on such a resource when AI can do what they do in a few minutes or more for WAY LESS? UX Design was supposedly a growing field ... not at anymore! Definitely one can do the same thing in that field that 10 did.
Further, future mobile AI devices will pull the information and put it all on the lock screen of your AI device visualizing the data in a fun new way. Technology that makes things simpler and more magical get adopted yet visits to websites will significantly decline.
For federal workers who have lost their jobs they are feeling this pain competing for jobs against each other and now AI. It will only get worse for designers because it's now cheaper and faster to use AI to design logos, sites, apps to even including do vibe coding for the front end development to possibly the backend but that's not my specialty yet no doubt I vibe coded front-ends.
ninetyninenine
Obviously AI is different. While LLMs are more of a power tool now, the future trendline points towards something that (possibly) replaces us. That's the entire concern right? I mean everyone knows this.
Is this not obvious?
Why do people hide behind this ridiculous analogy: "That's right, there are no carpenters or lumberjacks anymore because power tools were invented"
???
I mean sure the analogy is catchy and makes surface level sense, but can your brain do some analysis outside the context of an analogy??? It makes no sense that all of AI can be completely characterized by an analogy that isn't even accurate yet people delusionally just regurgitate the analogy most fitting with the fantasy reality they prefer.
scellus
If one wants to follow AI development mostly in the sense of LLMs and associated frontier models, that's an excellent list with over half of the names familiar, to whom I have converged independently.
I have a list in X for AI; it's the best source of information overall on the subject, although some podcasts or RSS feeds directly from the long-form writers would be quite close. (If one is a researcher themselves, then of course it's a must to follow the paper feeds, not commentary or secondary references.)
I'd add https://epoch.ai to the list, on podcasts at least Dwarkesh Patel; on blogs Peter Wildeford (a superforecaster), @omarsar0 aka elvis from DAIR in X, also many researchers directly although some of them like roon or @tszzl are more entertaining than informative.
The point about polluted information environment resonates on me; in general but especially with AI. You get a very incomplete and strange understanding by following something like NYT who seem to concentrate more on politics than technology itself.
Of course there are adjacent areas of ML or AI where the sources would be completely different, say protein or genomics models, or weather models, or research on diffusion, image generation etc. The field is nowadays so large and active that it's hard to grasp everything that is happening on the surface level.
Do you _have_ to follow? Of course not, people over here are just typically curious and willing to follow groundbreaking technological advancements. In some cases like in software development I'd also say just skipping AI is destructive to the career in the long term, although there one can take a tools approach instead of trying to keep track of every announcement. (My work is such that I'm expected to keep track of the whole thing on a general level.)
muglug
Just follow the first bullet point (read simonw's blog) and you'll probably be fine.
dvfjsdhgfv
Too lazy for that, a Fireship accompanying the morning coffee must suffice.
krat0sprakhar
+1 - super high quality and almost no clickbait
bzmrgonz
not to mention that soothing roller coaster voice of his!! hahaha.
umanwizard
> and why you must too
No, I don't think I do. Been working great for me so far.
codebolt
Just subscribing to OpenAI, Anthropic and Google on YouTube is pretty helpful. They post demos of all major new feature releases that are good to skim through to get a sense of where the frontier is moving (just take all claims about capabilities with a grain of salt).
I've also got some gems from Microsofts Build talks, specifically whenever Scott Hanselman and Mark Russinovich get together, e.g.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIFDVOXMNDc
reactordev
Andrej's talks have helped me tremendously. They're up on YT [0]. For a long time I used to mentor and help machine learning scientists but when I hear Andrej speak, it's like I'm the student without any knowledge. It was a really strange feeling at first but I've come to value so much. I'm Jon Snow. I know Nothing (compared to Andrej).
If you have a decent understanding of how LLMs work (you put in basically every piece of text you can find, get a statistical machine that models text really well, then use contractors to train it to model text in conversational form), then you probably don't need to consume a big diet of ongoing output from PR people, bloggers, thought leaders, and internet rationalists. That seems likely to get you going down some millenarian path that's not helpful.
Despite the feeling that it's a fast-moving field, most of the differences in actual models over the last years are in degree and not kind, and the majority of ongoing work is in tooling and integrations, which you can probably keep up with as it seems useful for your work. Remembering that it's a model of text and is ungrounded goes a long way to discerning what kinds of work it's useful for (where verification of output is either straightforward or unnecessary), and what kinds of work it's not useful for.