the problem is, obese or formerly obese people clan eat a lot of anything before the full feeling sets in, no matter what. Eggs, chicken..does not matter.
> It’s a daily struggle trying to NOT eat until literally feeling pain in the belly, and even then, I know if I wait 30 minutes more I can keep eating
Yes, but this is sort of the point. If we can make it not a daily struggle, probably a lot more people would be successful.
Generally, I think the solution of "just suffer" is a bad one. If people's solution requires a certain amount of pain, it's probably just a suboptimal solution, and we can do better.
The Time Magazine cover story in 1984 where they falsely claimed that consuming cholesterol from eggs and other sources was dangerous was a real turning point. That misunderstanding has caused tremendous harm to public health for decades. I think the journalists acted in good faith but they believed junk science.
> It's probably fine--unless you care about self-improvement or taking pride in your work.
I’m hired to solve business problems with technology, not to self-improve or get on my high horse because I hand-wrote a silly abstraction layer for the n-th time
And you/we will be replaced by an AI that will solve the business problem (the day they get so good to actually do that, which might happen or not but... who knows?)
After all, you can go and be a goat herder right now, and yet you are presumably not doing this.
Nothing is stopping you being a goat herder - the place that is paying you for solving business problems will continue just fine if you leave, after all. Your presence there is not required.
The chief officers and/or shareholders are probably the ones who are the most replaceable….
AI utopia is not needed for UBI that is true - but it will be much easier to become reality if “all the jobs” are taken.
Aside from all the snark - I think that the fundamental societal problem is that there will always be some shitty jobs that no one wants to do and there needs to be some system to force some people to do these jobs - call it capitalism, communism, or marriage. There is no way around this basic fact of the human condition
Herding goats doesn't solve the interesting technical problem I'm trying to solve.
Point is: if that problem is solvable without me, that's the win condition for everyone. Then I go herd goats (and have this nifty tool that helps me spec out an optimal goat fence while I'm at it).
> Point is: if that problem is solvable without me, that's the win condition for everyone.
The problem is solvable without you. I don't even need to know what the problem actually is, because the odds of you being one of the handful of the people in the world who are so critical that the world notices their passing is so low, I have a better chance of winning a lottery jackpot than of you being some critical piece of some solution.
I completely disagree - I think it’s the other way around.
Solving the problem - no matter what problem it is - is extremely dependent on you and every single human being (or animal for that matter) is a critical piece of their environment and circumstances.
I unironically have a 5 year plan to get out of tech and into something more “real”.
I want to work on something that helps actual humans not these “business problems”
There aare probably 2 ways to see te future of LLMs / AI: they are either going to have the capabilities to replace all white collar work, or they are not.
If you think they are going to replace us, then yo ucan either surrender or fight back, and personally I read all these anti-AI posts as fighting back, to help people realize we might be digging our own grave.
If, OTOH, you see AI as a force-multiplier tool that's never going to completely replace a human developer then yes, probably the smartest thing to do is to learn how to master this new tool, but at the same time keep in mind the side effects it might bring, like atrophy.
My personal goal has been to dig that grave ever since I could hold a shovel.
We've always been in the business of replacing humans in the 3-D's space (dirty, dangerous, dull... And to be clear. data manipulation for its own sake is dull). If we make AI that replaces 90% of what I do at my desk every day... We did it. We realized the dream from the old Tom Swift novels where he comes up with an idea for an invention and hands the idea off to his computer to extrapolate it, or the ship's computer in Star Trek acting like a perfect engineering and analytical assistant to take fuzzy asks from humans and turn them into useful output.
The problem is that this time, we're creating a competing intelligence that in theory could replace all work, AND, that competing intelligence is ultimately owned/controlled by a few dozen very rich guys.
I love to code, like fun code, solving a relatively small concrete problem with code feels rewarding to me....however, writing business code on the other hand? Not really.
I do however, love solving business problems. This is what I am hired for. I speak to VP/managers to improve their day to day. I come up with feasible solution and translate them into code.
If AI could actually code, like really code(not here is some code, it may or may not work go read documentation to figure out why it doesn't), I would just go and focus on creating affordable software solutions to medium/small businesses.
This is kind of like gardening/farming, before industrial revolution most crops required a huge work force, these days with all the equipment and advancements a single farmer can do a lot on their own with small staff. People still "hand" garden for pleasure, but without using the new tech they wouldn't be able to compete on a big scale.
I know many fear AI, but it is progress and it will never stop. I do think many devs are intelligent and will be able to evolve in the workplace.
For me AI is really powerful autocomplete. Like you said, I wrote the abstraction years ago. Writing the abstraction again now is not required.
A time and place may come where the AI are so powerful I’m not needed. That time is not right now.
I have used Rider for years at this point and it automatically handles most imports. It’s not AI, but its one of the things that is just not needed for me to even think about.
I agree, I was always annoyed in projects where these kids thought they were still in school and spinning up incredible levels of over abstraction that led to some really horrible security problems.
> I’m hired to solve business problems with technology, not to self-improve or get on my high horse because I hand-wrote a silly abstraction layer for the n-th time
So, this "solve business problems" is some temporary[1] gig for you?[2]
------------------------------
[1] I'm reminded of the anti-union people who are merely temporarily embarrassed millionaires.
[2] Skills atrophy. Maybe you won't need the atrophied skill in the future, but how sure are you that this is the case? The eventual outcome?
Are you a consultant? Because otherwise there’s a thing called a “career ladder”, and you are very much being paid to self-improve. And if you don’t, that’s going to feature prominently in your next promotion review.
As humans we have developed tools to ease our physical needs (we don’t need to run, walk or lift things) and now we have a tool that thinks and solve problems for us
Many have the attitude of finding one edge case that it doesn’t work well and dismiss AI as useful tool
I’m an early adopter and nowadays all I do is to co-write context documents so that my assistant can generate the code I need
AI gives you an approximated answer, it depends on you how to steer it to a good enough answer and this takes time and learning curve … and evolves really fast
Some people are just not good at constantly learning things
> Many have the attitude of finding one edge case that it doesn’t work well and dismiss AI as useful tool
Many programmers work on problems (nearly) *all day* where AI does not work well.
> AI gives you an approximated answer, it depends on you how to steer it to a good enough answer
Many programmers work on problem where correctness is of essential importance, i.e. if a code block is "semi-right" it is of no use - and even having to deal with code blocks where you cannot trust that the respective programmer did think deeply about such questions is a huge time sink.
> Some people are just not good at constantly learning things
Rather: some people are just not good at constantly looking beyond their programming bubble where AI might have some use.
Jenny, please try to conduct yourself with some sense of decorum here -- These are real people you're bullying. This isn't a hatemonger platform like some of the others. Please try to do better
they called me an idiot in the other thread for pointing out AI is broader than just LLMs (after they called everyone that uses AI an idiot) lol they’re clearly very angry and bitter, and I believe this is not the first account they’ve made to bombard threads with insults. in another comment they advocate for insulting the “AI idiots”
it’s not bullying in that it’s more entertaining than insulting, but still
ah in another comment (I am enjoying reading these):
> Ruthlessly bully LLM idiots
quite openly advocating for “bullying” people that use the bad scary neural nets!
Says the person who will find themselves unable to change the software even in the slightest way without having to large refactors across everything at the same time.
High quality code matters more than ever, would be my argument. The second you let the LLM sneak in some quick hack/patch instead of correctly solving the problem, is the second you invite it to continue doing that always.
I have a feeling this will only supercharge the long established industry practice of new devs or engineering leadership getting recruited and immediately criticising the entire existing tech stack, and pushing for (and often succeeding) a ground up rewrite in language/framework de jour. This is hilariously common in web work, particularly front end web work. I suspect there are industry sectors that're well protected from this, I doubt people writing firmware for fuel injection and engine management systems suffer too much from this, the Javascript/Nodejs/NPM scourge _probably_ hasn't hit the PowerPC or 68K embedded device programming workflow. Yet...
"high quality specifications" have _always_ been a thing that matters.
In my mind, it's somewhat orthogonal to code quality.
Waterfall has always been about "high quality specifications" written by people who never see any code, much less write it. Agile make specs and code quality somewhat related, but in at least some ways probably drives lower quality code in the pursuit of meeting sprint deadlines and producing testable artefacts at the expense of thoroughness/correctness/quality.
Otherwise I over eat crap and gain weight easily