I think the truth is somewhere in the middle, but I could be wrong. I work in a non-programming technical field and I am also impressed and concerned by the progress the models have made over the last few years, especially in terms of being able to “do my job”.
Like the other guy was saying, there are still issues with its implementations, and the second you begin to think it’s perfect or immutable, you notice issues that would have been show stoppers if they made it through. And at the end of the day, at least for what I do, if nobody is here to press the buttons, the AI will never be able to do its thing to begin with.
I also personally predict that the cost of tokens and utilizing AI services will eventually become overly expensive and encumbered, as does everything under capitalism. Name one thing that hasn’t gotten shittier and more expensive overall. The AI companies haven’t even begun to enter their enshittification stage yet.
I maintain that AI in its current form will NOT be able to produce truly novel thought or original work, as it can only put together the Legos that it already has ingested. Perhaps grunt work programming will require less manpower, but cutting-edge developments are still beyond the LLM’s grasp at the moment.
Software development is by far the most affected profession. Every time a new model gets released another part of my occupation can be done by it. People are moving the goalpost to focus on every mistake the llm makes to cope and fool themselves they are still not expendable and better than the llms. With enough confidence i can say that the vast majority of programmers are not.
Yeah. And the thing that people are completely ignoring is that humans are absolutely not infallible either. This is why we’re seeing so many vulnerabilities pop up now, because the work performed by humans over the last many decades is being picked apart by a relentless onslaught of automated calculation and critique by these LLMs.
I can see the passion a lot of programmers have for what they do and it reminds me of how artists feel when people try to produce art with an LLM. I hope the future brings a reasonable balance where programmers can actually use LLMs to advance their efforts instead of being replaced by it. There are some things that are just mindless brute-force effort and at the very least, hopefully that bit goes away and leaves programmers (and the rest of the world’s technical workforce) with the ability to exercise creativity instead of doing the annoying parts all day.
I think the truth is somewhere in the middle, but I could be wrong. I work in a non-programming technical field and I am also impressed and concerned by the progress the models have made over the last few years, especially in terms of being able to “do my job”.
Like the other guy was saying, there are still issues with its implementations, and the second you begin to think it’s perfect or immutable, you notice issues that would have been show stoppers if they made it through. And at the end of the day, at least for what I do, if nobody is here to press the buttons, the AI will never be able to do its thing to begin with.
I also personally predict that the cost of tokens and utilizing AI services will eventually become overly expensive and encumbered, as does everything under capitalism. Name one thing that hasn’t gotten shittier and more expensive overall. The AI companies haven’t even begun to enter their enshittification stage yet.
I maintain that AI in its current form will NOT be able to produce truly novel thought or original work, as it can only put together the Legos that it already has ingested. Perhaps grunt work programming will require less manpower, but cutting-edge developments are still beyond the LLM’s grasp at the moment.
Anyways, I welcome other opinions
Software development is by far the most affected profession. Every time a new model gets released another part of my occupation can be done by it. People are moving the goalpost to focus on every mistake the llm makes to cope and fool themselves they are still not expendable and better than the llms. With enough confidence i can say that the vast majority of programmers are not.
Yeah. And the thing that people are completely ignoring is that humans are absolutely not infallible either. This is why we’re seeing so many vulnerabilities pop up now, because the work performed by humans over the last many decades is being picked apart by a relentless onslaught of automated calculation and critique by these LLMs.
I can see the passion a lot of programmers have for what they do and it reminds me of how artists feel when people try to produce art with an LLM. I hope the future brings a reasonable balance where programmers can actually use LLMs to advance their efforts instead of being replaced by it. There are some things that are just mindless brute-force effort and at the very least, hopefully that bit goes away and leaves programmers (and the rest of the world’s technical workforce) with the ability to exercise creativity instead of doing the annoying parts all day.
Beautifully said, i agree completely !