- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
everytime i see a twitter screenshot i just know im looking at the dumbest people imaginable
Except for those comedy accounts. Some of those takes are sheer genius lol.
If you want to see stupider, look at Redditors. Fucking cesspool with less than zero redeeming value.
Not sure about the communities you’re visiting, the subreddits I seldom visit (because enshitification) have rather smart people.
I’m just gonna say I love your username!
A person who hasn’t debugged any code thinks programmers are done for because of “AI”.
Oh no. Anyways.
AI is fucking so useless when it comes to programming right now.
They can’t even fucking do math. Go make an AI do math right now, go see how it goes lol. Make it a, real world problem and give it lots of variables.
I have Visual Studio and decided to see what copilot could do. It added 7 new functions to my game with no calls or feedback to the player. When I tested what it did …it used 24 lines of code on a 150 line .CS to increase the difficulty of the game every time I take an action.
The context here is missing but just imagine someone going to Viridian forest and being met with level 70s in pokemon.
I asked ChatGPT to do a simple addition problem a while back and it gave me the wrong answer.
My favourite AI code test is code to point a heliostat mirror at (lattitude, longitude) at a target at (latitude, longitude, elevation)
After a few iterations to get the basics in place, “also create the function to select the mirror angle”
A basic fact that isn’t often described is that to reflect a ray you aim the mirror halfway between the source and the target. AI Congress up with the strangest non-working ways of aiming the mirror
Working with AI feels a lot like working with a newbie
It is not, not useful. Don’t throw a perfectly good hammer to the bin because some idiots say it can build a house on its own. Just like with hammers you need to make sure you don’t hit yourself in the thumb and use it for purpose
I find it useful for learning once you get the fundamentals down. I do it by trying to find all the bugs in the generated code, then see what could be cut out or restructured. It really gives more insight into how things actually work than just regular coding alone.
This isn’t as useful for coding actual programs though, since it would just take more time than necessary.
So true, it’s an amazing tool for learning. I’ve never been able to learn new frameworks so fast.
AI works very well as a consultant, but if you let it write the code, you’ll spend more time debugging because the errors it makes are often subtle and not the types of errors humans make.
deleted by creator
Me, a person with no coding skills, had the ai write code and I can’t see if there’s anything wrong with the results. So the results must be good.
It’s not like I don’t have a basic calculator to test the output, is it?
I might’ve also understated my python a little bit, as in I understand what the code does. Obviously you could break it, that wasn’t the point. I was more thinking that throwing math problems at what is essentially a language interpreter isn’t the right way to go about things. I don’t know shit though. I guess we’ll see.
I have no idea what you’re trying to say here.
If you want to learn how to code, writing a calculator with a ui isn’t a bad idea. But then you should code it yourself because otherwise you won’t learn much.
If you want to try and see if llms can write code that executes, then fine, you succeeded. I absolutely fail to see what you gain from that experiment though.
I’ve done a few courses and learned the basics, but it wasn’t until I started using some assistance that I got a deeper understanding of Python in general.
I came in very late, obviously, but I’ve still tried to learn coding on and off by myself since the late 90’s, although I ended up on another career path altogether. I’m in my 40’s and I’ve finally at least made some decent executable code.
Made myself a scalable clock since my eyes are failing, for example. It was a success and I use it daily. Would never have figured that out without some AI help. Still had to do some registry tweaking and shit since I’m stuck on windows on my workstation but it works wonderfully. Just a little widget but it improved my life greatly.
I’ve also cobbled together a workable alternative to notepad that I use as a diary of sorts. Never would’ve figured that out alone either.
As I see it at least whatever AI assistant you use at least doesn’t give one the gatekeeping or abuse one gets if they ask a relatively simple question somewhere else. Kinda like this, I guess.
TL;DR: In some situations our current 'AI’s can be helpful.
Expand that into 10k line custom programs and you’ll begin having nightmarish issues.
That might be the underlying problem. Software project management around small projects is easy. Anything that has a basic text editor and a Python interpreter will do. We have all these fancy tools because shit gets complicated. Hell, I don’t even like writing 100 lines without git.
A bunch of non-programmers make a few basic apps with ChatGPT and think we’re all cooked.
No doubt, I was merely suggesting that throwing math problems might not have been the intended use for what is essentially a language interpreter, obviously depending on the in question.
Tinfoil hat time:
That Ace account is just an alt of the original guy and rage baiting to give his posting more reach.
Counter-tinfoil hat time:
That Ace account is an AI.
Everyone being a bot is just a given on Shitter
AI isn’t ready to replace just about anybody’s job, and probably never will be technically, economically or legally viable.
That said, the c-suit class are certainly going to try. Not only do they dream of optimizing all human workers out of every workforce, they also desperately need to recoup as much of the sunk cost that they’ve collectively dumped into the technology.
Take OpenAI for example, they lost something like $5,000,000,000 last year and are probably going to lose even more this year. Their entire business plan relies on at least selling people on the idea that AI will be able to replace human workers. The minute people realize that OpenAI isn’t going to conquer the world, and instead end up as just one of many players in the slop space, the entire bottom will fall out of the company and the AI bubble will burst.
Never? That’s a long time. How specific a definition of AI are you using?
Well if you’re that deep into losses, spending 10M in marketing goes a long way.
People who think AI will replace X job either don’t understand X job or don’t understand AI.
It’s both.
This is the correct answer.
Yeah, particularly with CEOs. People don’t understand that in an established company (not a young startup), the primary role of the CEO is to take blame for unpopular decisions and resign or be fired so it would seem like the company is changing course.
Ha I never thought of CEOs this way but now so many things make sense. Especially things being exactly as they were when CEOs change, but with a mountain of meaningless changes that never do any good.
Not that I ever thought they know what they were doing, but now I get what they’re used for.
Yup. It’s kinda my conspiracy theory, but also, it’s really not, it’s like a public secret at this point.
They don’t get these huuuuge golden parachutes for nothing. They get it precisely because they need to take the fall at some point, and if the fall is big enough, they might not even get a new job at a similar level.
It’s a disgusting system, but I’m not trying to absolve CEOs of anything here. They very much know what they’re getting into when they sign contracts for tens of millions per year in total comp, with generous exit packages. I’m just saying that’s why companies won’t replace them with AI, or even just cheaper proven leaders, any time soon, despite the fact that no CEO is worth the amount of money they make, in actual productivity.
Their only mistake is believing they make a positive change lol
For basically everyone at least 9 in 10 people you know are… bless their hearts…not winning a nobel prize any time soon.
My wife works a people-facing job, and I could never do it. Most people don’t understand most things. That’s not to say most people don’t know anything, but there are not a lot of polymaths out and about.
In all seriousness though I do worry for the future of juniors. All the things that people criticise LLMs for, juniors do too. But if nobody hires juniors they will never become senior
Sounds like a Union is a good thing. Apprenticeship programs.
Something tells me Meta and Amazon won’t take kindly to any unionization.
This is completely tangential but I think juniors will always be capable of things that LLMs aren’t. There’s a human component to software that I don’t think can be replaced without human experience. The entire purpose of software is for humans to use it. So since the LLM has never experienced using software while being a human, there will always be a divide. Therefore, juniors will be capable of things that LLMs aren’t.
Idk, I might be missing a counterpoint, but it makes sense to me.
The entire purpose of software is for humans to use it.
The good news is that once AI replaces humans for everything, there will be no need to produce software (or anything else) for humans and AI will be out of work.
Honestly, I could see a world, not super far from now, but not right around the corner, where we’ve created automonous agent driven robots that continue carrying on to do the jobs they’ve been made to do long after the last of the humans are gone. An echo of our insane capitalistic lives, endlessly looping into eternity.
Lmfao I love these threads. “I haven’t built anything myself with the thing I’m claiming makes you obsolete but trust me it makes you obsolete”
Pinky is on form!
I’m still waiting for the release of 100% A1 written software.
(Spoiler: when it comes, it will have been heavily edited by meat popsicles).
I’ve made 100% AI software already. It was slightly more complex than a hello world, tho.
I had a dude screaming pretty much the same thing at me yesterday on here (on a different account), despite the fact that I’m senior-level, near the top of my field and that all the objective data as well as anecdotal reports from tons of other people says otherwise. Like, okay buddy, sure. People seem to just like fighting things online to feel better about themselves, even if the thing they’re fighting doesn’t really exist.
I’m a senior BA working on a project to replace some outdated software with a new booking management and payment system. One of our minor stakeholders is an overly eager tech bro who insists on bringing up AI in every meeting, he’s gone as far as writing up and sending proposals to myself and project leads.
We all just roll our eyes when a new email arrives. Especially when there’s almost no significant detail in these proposals, it’s all conjecture based of what he’s read online…on tech bro websites.
Oh and the best part, this guy has no experience in system development or design or anything AI related. He doesn’t even work in IT. But he researchs AI in his spare time and uses it as a side hustle…
My mate is applying to Amazon as warehouse worker. He has an IT degree.
My coworker in the bookkeeping department has two degrees. Accountancy and IT. She can’t find an IT job.
At the other side though, my brother, an experienced software developer, is earning quite a lot of money now.
Basically, the industry is not investing in new blood.
As someone trying to get a job in IT, I’m just going to ignore this comment :)
My company was desperate to find a brand new dev straight out of the oven we could still mold to our sensibilities late last year when everything seemed doomed. Yes, it was one hire out of like 10 interviewed candidates, but point is, there are companies still hiring. Our CTO straight up judges people who use an LLM and don’t know how the code actually works. Mr. “Just use an AI agent” would never get the job.
Don’t you worry, my job will be replaced by AI as well. By 2026 peppol invoices will be enforced in Belgium. Reducing bookkeepers their workload.
ITers replacing my job: 😁😁😁
ITers replacing their own jobs: 😧😧😧
Not sure how you manage to draw conclusions by comparing two different fields.
Basically, the industry is not investing in new blood.
Yeah I think it makes sense out of an economic motivation. Often the code-quality of a junior is worse than that of an AI, and a senior has to review either, so they could just directly prompt the junior task into the AI.
The experience and skill to quickly grasp code and intention (and having a good initial idea where it should be going architecturally) is what is asked, which is obviously something that seniors are good at.
It’s kinda sad that our profession/art is slowly dying out because juniors are slowly replaced by AI.
Yeah, I’ve been seeing the same. Purely economically it doesn’t make sense with junior developers any more. AI is faster, cheaper and usually writes better code too.
The problem is that you need junior developers working and getting experience, otherwise you won’t get senior developers. I really wonder how development as a profession will be in 10 years
AI isn’t ready to replace programmers, engineers or IT admins yet. But let’s be honest if some project manager or CTO somewhere hasn’t already done it they’re at least planning it.
Then eventually to save themselves or out of sheer ignorance they’ll blame the chaos that results on the few remaining people who know what they’re doing because they won’t be able to admit or understand the fact that the bold decision they took to “embrace” AI and increase the company’s bottom line which everyone else in their management bubble believes in has completely mangled whatever system their company builds or uses. More useful people will get fired and more actual work will get shifted to AI. But because that’ll still make the number go up the management types will look even better and the spread of AI will carry on. Eventually all systems will become an unwieldy mess nobody can even hope to repair.
This is just IT, I’m pretty sure most other industries will eventually suffer the same fate. Global supply chains will collapse and we’ll all get sent back to the dark ages.
TL,DR: The real problem with AI isn’t that it’ll become too powerful and choose to kill us, but that corporate morons will overestimate how powerful it already is and that will cause our eventual downfall.
AI isn’t ready to replace programmers, engineers or IT admins yet.
On the other hand… it’s been about 2.5 years since chatgpt came out, and it’s gone from you being lucky it could write a few python lines without errors to being able to one shot a mobile phone level complexity game, even with self hosted models.
Who knows where it’ll be in a few years
As an end user with little knowledge about programming, I’ve seen how hard it is for programmers to get things working well many times over the years. AI as a time saver for certain simple tasks, sure, but no way in hell they’ll be replacing humans in my lifetime.
The best part is how all programmers at Google, Apple, and Microsoft have been fired and now everything is coded by AI. This guy seems pretty smart.
OpenAI hasn’t even replaced their own developers, and they push out the biggest LLM turd around.
There actually isn’t a single human programmer in the entire world. Every single one was fired and replaced by Grok, ChatGPT and Deepseek.
I know all my old friends who worked at Microsoft are now janitors!
I work in QA, even devs who’ve worked for 10+ years make dumb mistakes every so often. I wouldn’t want to do QA when AI is writing the software, it’s just gonna give me even more work 🫠
I’m a senior developer and I sometimes even look back thinking “how the fuck did I make that mistake yesterday”. I know I’m blind to my own mistakes, so I know testers may have some really valid feedback when I think I did everything right :)
That’s what we’re for in the end
even devs who’ve worked for 10+ years make dumb mistakes
everyso, so often.there, I fixed it for you
it’s funny that some people think programming has a human element that can’t be replaced but art doesn’t.
Art doesn’t have to fulfill a practical purpose nor does it usually have security vulnerabilities. Not taking a position on the substance, but these are two major differences between the two.
my point exactly. practical purpose and security are things you can analyze and solve for as a machine at least in theory. artistic value comes from the artistic intent. by intent I don’t mean to argue against death of the author, as I believe in it, but the very fact that there is intent to create art.
Art fulfills many practical purposes. You live in an abode designed by architects, presumably painted and furnished with many objects d’art such as, a couch, a wardrobe, ceiling fixtures, a bathtub; also presumably festooned with art on the walls; you cook and eat food in designed cookware, crockery and cutlery, and that food is frequently more than pure sustenance; and, presumably you spend a fair amount of time consuming media such as television, film, literature, music, comedy, dance, or even porn.
Art can be flawed. Programming is an exact set of instructions for a computer to comprehend in the most literal sense. There isn’t nearly as much room for errors. A hallucination during image generation won’t cause any damage. A hallucination regarding those very specific instructions can cause problems.
Programming is definitely not an exact science.
Armchair amateur here but there’s often a lot of talk about O(n), memory optimization, trash cleanup, compression methods, race conditions, vertex choice in matrices etc…
It reminds me of the neo-plasticists, whose argument was there is no significant difference between painting a farmer next to a pile of hay vs painting a pink square next to a yellow square: both are just arranging representative symbols on a canvas.
Yeah but what about those 18 toed porn girls with stumpy legs?
AAA gamedev here. Had a guy scream at me on here on a different account for several days straight last week that “AI will eventually take your job, too, just wait and see” after I told the guy “all you have to do as an artist is make better quality work than AI slop can produce, which is easy for most professionals; AI is still useful in production pipelines to speed up efficiency, but it will never replace human intuition because it can’t actually reason and doesn’t have feelings, which is all art is and is what programming requires”.
Got told that I was a naive and bad person with survivorship bias and hubris who doesn’t understand the plight of artists and will eventually also be replaced, as if I’m not a technical artist myself and don’t work with plenty of other artistic and technical disciplines every single day. Like, okay, dude. I guess nearly a decade of senior-level experience means nothing. I swear, my team had tried and tossed away anywhere from 5 to 10 potential “cutting-edge AI production tools” before the general public had even heard about ChatGPT because most of them have such strict limited use-cases that they aren’t practically applicable to most things, but the guy was convinced that we had to boycott and destroy all AI tools because every artist was gonna be out of a job soon. Lol. Lmao, even.
it’s just people with no skills and all resentment.
Yep.
Just checked and the mods removed all my comments in that convo, but left the other guy’s up, despite me providing objective evidence and research (from Harvard, no less). The annoying social media circlejerk from resentful losers is so real.
Computer programs need lots of separate pieces to operate together in subtle ways or your program crashes. With art on the other hand I haven’t heard of anyone’s brain crashing when they looked at AI art with too many fingers.
It’s not so much that AI can’t do it, but the LLMs we have now certainly can’t.
i agree llms can’t do shit right now, what I was talking about was a hypothetical future in which somehow these useless techbros found a way to make them worth a shit. they certainly would be able to make a logical program work than infuse any artistic value into any audio or image.
programs can be written to respond to a need that can be detected and analyzed and solved by a fairly advanced computer. art needs intent, a desire to create art, whether to convey feelings, or to make a statement, or just ask questions. programs can’t want, feel or wonder about things. they can pretend to do so but we all know pretending isn’t highly valued in art.
I get the idea that it’s only temporary, but I’d much rather have a current gen AI paint a picture than attempt to program a guidance system or a heart monitor
por que no los fucking neither, is what i think.
deleted by creator
