1061
Now listen here you little shit (media.piefed.social)
submitted 7 months ago by to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev
98 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -4 points 7 months ago (8 children)

This is a bold claim I will not make.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    If you are complete novice then obviously not but I think anyone reasonably proficient in a language would be able to identify optimisations that an AI just doesn't seem to perceive largely because humans are better at context.

    It's like that question about whether it's worth driving your car to the car wash if the car wash is only 10 metres away. AIs have no experience of the real world so they don't inherently understand that you can't wash a car if it's not at the car wash. A human would instantly know that that's a stupid statement without even thinking about it, and unless you instruct an AI to actually deeply think about something they just give you the first answer they come up with.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    What's why they're pushing for the datacenters, they want to turn make every query that deep. The tech is here, but the ability to sustain it isn't. They build the data centers, kick the developers out, depress the education market for it, and then raise the prices.

    Companies will be paying the AI companies 60k per year per seat in a decade.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 7 months ago

    I agree with you. But the tool will output a basic code that mostly do what asked in seconds instead of tens of minutes if not hours. So now we could argue if the optimization you make are worth the added cost I'd writing the code yourself or if it's better to have the tool to generate the code and then optimizing it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 4 points 7 months ago (2 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    You will always be better at decisions than an n-dimensional matrix of numbers on an overpriced GPU.

    I'd be careful about these claims. Maybe with our current iteration of "attention-based" LLMs, yes. But keep in mind that our way of processing information is strongly limited compared to how much data is fed to these LLMs while training, so they in theory have a lot more foundation to be able to reason about new problems.

    We're vastly more capable at the moment at interpreting our limited view on foreign code, being actually creative, find new ways to reason, yes. Capable developers (open source...) often have seen quite a bit more code than the average developer and are highly skilled, still with just a tiny subset of the code that an LLM has seen.

    But say these models improve in creativity and "higher-level of thought" through whatever means (e.g. through more reinforcement learning). Well, let's just say I'm careful with these claims. These LLMs are already quite a help with stupid boilerplaty code (less so with novel stuff, and writing idiomatic non-redundant code, but compared to 2-3 years ago it's quite a step already, to the point that they're actually helpful, disregarding all the hype and obvious marketing strategies of these AI-companies)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (-1 replies)