[HN Gopher] AI Engineer Reading List
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       AI Engineer Reading List
        
       Author : ingve
       Score  : 185 points
       Date   : 2025-01-13 18:11 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.latent.space)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.latent.space)
        
       | nickpsecurity wrote:
       | This is a great survey. Combine it with the courses below for
       | best results:
       | 
       | https://www.trybackprop.com/blog/top_ml_learning_resources
        
       | joshdavham wrote:
       | Awesome list!
        
       | kamikazeturtles wrote:
       | I don't know what an "AI Engineer" is, but, is reading research
       | papers actually necessary if the half life of the relevancy of
       | many of these papers is only a few months until the next
       | breakthrough happens?
       | 
       | I have a feeling, unless you're dabbling at the cutting edge of
       | AI, there's no point in reading research papers. Just get a feel
       | for how these LLMs respond then build a pretty and user friendly
       | app on top of them. Knowing the difference between "multi head
       | attention" and "single head attention" isn't very useful if
       | you're just using OpenAI or Groq's API.
       | 
       | Am I missing something here? I'd love to know where I'm wrong
        
         | feznyng wrote:
         | There's research papers on system design involving llms that
         | would definitely be useful in practical contexts.
        
         | eKIK wrote:
         | I consider myself to be an (occasional) user of AI services
         | like the ones OpenAI and others provide. I've learned how to
         | consume the services reasonably effectively, and make good use
         | of them, but that's about it. I am not an AI engineer.
         | 
         | Similarly I know how to call cryptography libraries to get my
         | passwords hashed using a suitable cipher before storing them. I
         | don't understand the deep math behind why a certain cipher is
         | secure, but that's fine. I can still make good use of
         | cryptographic functions. I'm not a cryptography engineer either
         | :).
         | 
         | My take on it is that if you should call yourself any kind of
         | "XYZ Engineer", you should be able to understand the inner
         | workings of XYZ.
         | 
         | This reading list is most likely (mostly) for those who want to
         | get a really deep understanding and eventuellt work on
         | contributing to the "foundational systems" (for a lack of a
         | better word) one day.
         | 
         | Hope that helps.
        
           | swyx wrote:
           | i mostly agree w you, but theres a wide spectrum of
           | "understand the inner workings" given rising complexity.
           | 
           | consider:
           | 
           | - does a React/frotnend engineer need to know everything
           | about react internals to be good at their job?
           | 
           | - does a commercial airline pilot need to know every single
           | subsystem in order to do their job?
           | 
           | - do you, a sophisticated hackernewsian, really know how your
           | computer works?
           | 
           | more knowledge is always (usually) better but as a thing
           | diffuses into practice and industry theres a natural stopping
           | point that "technician" level people reach that is still
           | valuable to society bc of relative talent supply and demand.
        
         | FanaHOVA wrote:
         | We covered that too: https://www.latent.space/p/ai-engineer
        
           | randcraw wrote:
           | A nice overview. In short, I would describe an AI Engineer as
           | someone who integrates existing AI tools and libraries into a
           | reliable system that is fielded in a production environment.
           | They also must know how to tune AI components and assess them
           | for performance, decline/drift, and failure. Most AEs have a
           | MS or less (CS, data science, statistics, etc), since it's
           | not really a research role. Finally, AI Engineers don't
           | invent AI tools or fix what's missing/broken within them.
           | That's the role of an AI scientist.
        
         | jsight wrote:
         | I think you need to have a pretty good understanding of the
         | underlying workings of at least a couple of modern models. You
         | should also follow along closely enough to see if major changes
         | happen in the way they are built.
         | 
         | But watching every new paper? Nah, that's mostly only useful if
         | you have a large enough amount of compute to try them out. And
         | most of us don't have that anyway.
        
         | lolinder wrote:
         | > I don't know what an "AI Engineer" is, but, is reading
         | research papers actually necessary
         | 
         | Let's put it this way: if even half the people who call
         | themselves "AI Engineers" would read the research in the field,
         | we'd have a lot less hype and a lot more success in finding the
         | actual useful applications of this technology. As is, most "AI
         | Engineers" assume the same thing you do and consider "AI
         | Engineering" to be "I know how to plug this black box into this
         | other black box and return the result as JSON! Pay me!".
         | Meanwhile most AI startups are doomed from the start because
         | what they set out to do is known to be a bad fit.
        
           | wnmurphy wrote:
           | > I know how to plug this black box into this other black box
           | and return the result as JSON!
           | 
           | To be fair, most of software engineering is this.
        
           | gazchop wrote:
           | Careful now. Don't want to upset the future generation of
           | unemployed prompt engineers.
        
         | richardw wrote:
         | The terms are being diluted hard. Everyone from a plumber with
         | a no-code RAG automation tool to a FAANG phd can and have
         | claimed the role "AI engineer", and it can be true depending on
         | the context.
        
           | jimbokun wrote:
           | The new "Data Scientist"!
        
         | swyx wrote:
         | hi! author here.
         | 
         | > Just get a feel for how these LLMs respond then build a
         | pretty and user friendly app on top of them.
         | 
         | as you know, "just" is a very loaded word in software
         | engineering. The entire thesis of AI Eng is that this attidude
         | of "just slap a UI on an LLM bro whats so hard" is a rapidly
         | deepening field, with its own stack and specialization (which,
         | yes, some if not much of which is unnecessary, vc funded hypey
         | complexity merchantism, but some of which is also valid), and
         | if you do not take it seriously, others will, and do so running
         | rings around those who have decided to not even try to push
         | this frontier, passively waiting for model progress to solve
         | everything.
         | 
         | i've seen this play out before in underappreciated subfields of
         | engineering that became their own thing, with their own
         | language, standard stack, influencers, debates, controversies,
         | IPOs, whole 9 yards.... frontend eng, mobile eng, SRE, data
         | eng, you name it. you just have to see the level and quality of
         | work that these people are doing that is sufficiently distinct
         | from MLE and product/fullstack webdev to appreciate that it
         | probably deserves its own field of study, and while it will
         | NEVER be as prestigious as AI research, there will be a ton
         | more people employed in these roles than there can be in
         | research and thats a perfectly fine occupation too.
         | 
         | I'm even helping instruct a course about it this week as it
         | happens if you want to see what a practical syllabus for it
         | looks like https://maven.com/noah-hein/ai-engineering-intro
        
           | swyx wrote:
           | also my biz partner would be mad if i didnt also mention the
           | conference im putting on next month
           | 
           | https://www.latent.space/p/2025-summit
        
       | swyx wrote:
       | hi! author here! putting together a list like this is
       | intimidating - for every thing i pick there are a dozen other
       | suitable candidates so please view this as a curriculum with
       | broadly prescriptive weightings, with the understanding that the
       | CURRENTLY_RELEVANT_PAPER is always a moving pointer rather than
       | fixed reference.
       | 
       | we went thru this specific reading list in our paper club:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnIMY9pLPdg
       | 
       | if you are interested in a narrative version.
        
         | andrekorol wrote:
         | I appreciate the effort put into curating and maintaining this
         | list, good job on that!
         | 
         | I'm curious, is there also some specific existing "AI
         | Researcher Reading List" you would personally recommend? Or do
         | you plan on making and maintaining one?
        
           | swyx wrote:
           | im no researcher so no, but i would start with the llm
           | courses at stanford, uc berkeley, stanford, and princeton.
        
       | bbor wrote:
       | Heh, always fascinating to see how the term "AI" has been
       | swallowed nigh-completely by the recent exciting developments in
       | DL. All those papers and not a single mention of Russell &
       | Norvig, Minsky, Shannon, Lenat, etc.!
       | 
       | I'm sure it's a great list for what it is, I just wanted to be
       | pedantic for a bit ;). If you're interested in an introduction to
       | AI as a broader topic, most graduate courses use the same book
       | (Russel & Norvig) and others may publish their syllabi online.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-01-13 23:00 UTC)