6 ms·

I mean was he really wrong? As models like OpenAI Codex get more powerful over time, they will start eating into large chunks of dev work as well...

chrisco255 4y ago
Yes. Translating business requirements, customer context, engineering constraints, etc. into usable, practical, functional code, and then maintaining that code and extending it is so far beyond the horizon, that many other skillsets will replaced before programming is. After all, at that point, the AI itself, if it's so smart, should be able to improve itself indefinitely. In which case we're fucked. Programming will be the last thing to be automated before the singularity. Unlike artwork, precision and correctness is absolutely critical in coding.
- carnitine 4y ago
  The tail end of programming will be the last thing to be replaced, maybe. I don’t see why CRUD apps get to hide under the umbrella of programming ultra-advanced AI.
  - chrisco255 4y ago
    Let me know when you can speak English to a computer and have it generate CRUD code that satisfies all engineering and design constraints. The AI will need to be dynamic enough to understand nuance, missing gaps in the requirements spec, have context on the application being built, able to suggest improvements on product design, know how to make changes through the same conversational interface, etc. Accomplishing that is achieving general AI. In the meantime, there are plenty of boilerplate ORMs and simplistic API template tools that make production of bog standard CRUD apps dead simple. Of course, they all have their drawbacks and trade-offs, and aren't always suitable. But I don't see the amount of software engineering work reducing as a result of these no-code, low-code tools, do you?
    - atleta 4y ago
      Probably not. People tend to think that tasks that make us think hard require general intelligence just because that's the tool we use to solve that problem. The AI doesn't have to be very good to be able to replace CRUD web app developers (that is, most of us). As I see, the real challenge to solve is for it to be able to hold context and be able to communicate iteratively. Also, as you say find missing gaps. That's important. Other than that, you tell it what you want, it creates something and then you tell it to change things around. Which is, BTW, pretty similar to how it works with biological life based developers. Though as we're lazy, we like to clarify a lot of things up front (and either drive customers crazy or teach them that this is the way it works). If you have an AI that spits out code in a few minutes, it may not matter a lot. Most of the programming jobs are indeed about making relatively simple stuff from standard components.
    - nl 4y ago
      Let me know when you can speak English to a computer and have it generate CRUD code that satisfies all engineering and design constraints. The AI will need to be dynamic enough to understand nuance, missing gaps in the requirements spec, have context on the application being built, able to suggest improvements on product design, know how to make changes through the same conversational interface, etc. Let me know when you find a single programmer who can do that reliably.
    - la64710 4y ago
      Is it that hard to do? Just design a solution that uses Alexa voice services to parse the vocal input via NLP and then invoke a lambda function to call a sagemaker or gpt-3 model to generate code. Granted it will take a little while to be perfect but are we really far from it?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
pizza 4y ago
No worry, the one thing humans can do that robots can't (yet) is fill spare time with ever more work https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson's_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson's_law
nlh 4y ago
Large chunks, yes, but all that means is that engineers will move up the abstraction stack and become more efficient, not that engineers will be replaced. Bytecode -> Assembly -> C -> higher level languages -> AI-assisted higher-level languages
- bckr 4y ago
  > engineers will move up the abstraction stack and become more efficient Above a certain threshold of ability, yes. The same will hold true for designers. DALL-E-alikes will be integrated with the Adobe suite. The most cutting edge designers will speak 50 variations of their ideas into images, then use their hard-earned granular skills to fine-tune the results. They'll (with no code) train models in completely new, unique-to-them styles--in 2D, 3D, and motion. Organizations will pay top dollar for designers who can rapidly infuse their brands with eye-catching material in unprecedented volume. Imitators will create and follow YouTube tutorials. Mom & pop shops will have higher fidelity marketing materials in half the time and half the cost. All will be ever as it was.
- Isinlor 4y ago
  At some point we will be "replaced". When you get AI to be able to navigate all user interfaces, communicate with other agents, plan long term and execute short term, we will no longer be the main drivers of economical growth. At some point AI will become as powerful as companies. And then AI will be able to sustain positive feedback loop of creating more powerful company like ecosystems that will create even more powerful ecosystems. This process will be fundamentally limited by available power and the sun can provide a lot of power. Eventually AI will be able to support space economy and then the only limit will be the universe.
  - visarga 4y ago
    > At some point we will be "replaced". We will be united with the AI, we're already relying on it so much that it has become a part of our extended minds.
    - 4y ago
0F 4y ago
Literally everyone on this website is in denial. They all approach it by asking which fields will be safe. No field is safe. “But it’s not going to happen for a long time.” Climate deniers say the same thing and you think they should be wearing the dunce hat? The average person complains bitterly about climate deniers who say that it’s “my grandkids problem lol” but when I corner the average person into admitting AI is a problem the universal response is that it’s a long way off. And that’s not even true! The drooling idiots are willing to tear down billionaires and governments and any institution whatsoever in order to protect economic equality and a high standard of living — they would destroy entire industries like a rampaging stampede of belligerent buffalos if it meant reducing carbon emissions a little but when it comes to the biggest threat to human well-being in history, there they are in the corner hitting themselves on their helmeted head with an inflatable hammer. Fucking. Brilliant.
- dntrkv 4y ago
  I don't think anyone is in denial about this, it's just not something anyone should concern themselves with in the foreseeable future. AI that can replace a dev or designer is nowhere close to becoming a reality. Just because we have some cool demos that show some impressive capabilities in a narrow application does not mean we can extrapolate that capability to something that is many times more complex.
  - hackinthebochs 4y ago
    What does nowhere close mean to you? 10 years? 50 years?
  - 0F 4y ago
    I strongly and emphatically disagree. You frame it like we invented these AIs. Did we write the algorithms that actually run when it’s producing its output? Of course not, we can’t understand them let alone write them. We just sift around until we find them. So obviously the situations lends its self to surprises. Every other year we get surprised by things that all the “experts” said was 50 years off or impossible, have you forgotten already?
throwaway675309 4y ago
I mean not really, even a layman non-artist can take a look at a generated picture from DALLE and determine if it meets some set of criteria from their clients. But the reverse is not true, they won't be able to properly vet a piece of code generated by an AI since that will require technical expertise. (You could argue if the piece of code produced the requisite set of output that they would have some marginal level of confidence but they would never really know for sure without being able to understand the actual code)

chrisco255 4y ago

Yes. Translating business requirements, customer context, engineering constraints, etc. into usable, practical, functional code, and then maintaining that code and extending it is so far beyond the horizon, that many other skillsets will replaced before programming is. After all, at that point, the AI itself, if it's so smart, should be able to improve itself indefinitely. In which case we're fucked. Programming will be the last thing to be automated before the singularity. Unlike artwork, precision and correctness is absolutely critical in coding.

carnitine 4y ago
The tail end of programming will be the last thing to be replaced, maybe. I don’t see why CRUD apps get to hide under the umbrella of programming ultra-advanced AI.
- chrisco255 4y ago
  Let me know when you can speak English to a computer and have it generate CRUD code that satisfies all engineering and design constraints. The AI will need to be dynamic enough to understand nuance, missing gaps in the requirements spec, have context on the application being built, able to suggest improvements on product design, know how to make changes through the same conversational interface, etc. Accomplishing that is achieving general AI. In the meantime, there are plenty of boilerplate ORMs and simplistic API template tools that make production of bog standard CRUD apps dead simple. Of course, they all have their drawbacks and trade-offs, and aren't always suitable. But I don't see the amount of software engineering work reducing as a result of these no-code, low-code tools, do you?
  - atleta 4y ago
    Probably not. People tend to think that tasks that make us think hard require general intelligence just because that's the tool we use to solve that problem. The AI doesn't have to be very good to be able to replace CRUD web app developers (that is, most of us). As I see, the real challenge to solve is for it to be able to hold context and be able to communicate iteratively. Also, as you say find missing gaps. That's important. Other than that, you tell it what you want, it creates something and then you tell it to change things around. Which is, BTW, pretty similar to how it works with biological life based developers. Though as we're lazy, we like to clarify a lot of things up front (and either drive customers crazy or teach them that this is the way it works). If you have an AI that spits out code in a few minutes, it may not matter a lot. Most of the programming jobs are indeed about making relatively simple stuff from standard components.
  - nl 4y ago
    Let me know when you can speak English to a computer and have it generate CRUD code that satisfies all engineering and design constraints. The AI will need to be dynamic enough to understand nuance, missing gaps in the requirements spec, have context on the application being built, able to suggest improvements on product design, know how to make changes through the same conversational interface, etc. Let me know when you find a single programmer who can do that reliably.
  - la64710 4y ago
    Is it that hard to do? Just design a solution that uses Alexa voice services to parse the vocal input via NLP and then invoke a lambda function to call a sagemaker or gpt-3 model to generate code. Granted it will take a little while to be perfect but are we really far from it?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

pizza 4y ago

No worry, the one thing humans can do that robots can't (yet) is fill spare time with ever more work https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson's_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson's_law

nlh 4y ago

Large chunks, yes, but all that means is that engineers will move up the abstraction stack and become more efficient, not that engineers will be replaced. Bytecode -> Assembly -> C -> higher level languages -> AI-assisted higher-level languages

bckr 4y ago
> engineers will move up the abstraction stack and become more efficient Above a certain threshold of ability, yes. The same will hold true for designers. DALL-E-alikes will be integrated with the Adobe suite. The most cutting edge designers will speak 50 variations of their ideas into images, then use their hard-earned granular skills to fine-tune the results. They'll (with no code) train models in completely new, unique-to-them styles--in 2D, 3D, and motion. Organizations will pay top dollar for designers who can rapidly infuse their brands with eye-catching material in unprecedented volume. Imitators will create and follow YouTube tutorials. Mom & pop shops will have higher fidelity marketing materials in half the time and half the cost. All will be ever as it was.
Isinlor 4y ago
At some point we will be "replaced". When you get AI to be able to navigate all user interfaces, communicate with other agents, plan long term and execute short term, we will no longer be the main drivers of economical growth. At some point AI will become as powerful as companies. And then AI will be able to sustain positive feedback loop of creating more powerful company like ecosystems that will create even more powerful ecosystems. This process will be fundamentally limited by available power and the sun can provide a lot of power. Eventually AI will be able to support space economy and then the only limit will be the universe.
- visarga 4y ago
  > At some point we will be "replaced". We will be united with the AI, we're already relying on it so much that it has become a part of our extended minds.
  - 4y ago

0F 4y ago

Literally everyone on this website is in denial. They all approach it by asking which fields will be safe. No field is safe. “But it’s not going to happen for a long time.” Climate deniers say the same thing and you think they should be wearing the dunce hat? The average person complains bitterly about climate deniers who say that it’s “my grandkids problem lol” but when I corner the average person into admitting AI is a problem the universal response is that it’s a long way off. And that’s not even true! The drooling idiots are willing to tear down billionaires and governments and any institution whatsoever in order to protect economic equality and a high standard of living — they would destroy entire industries like a rampaging stampede of belligerent buffalos if it meant reducing carbon emissions a little but when it comes to the biggest threat to human well-being in history, there they are in the corner hitting themselves on their helmeted head with an inflatable hammer. Fucking. Brilliant.

dntrkv 4y ago
I don't think anyone is in denial about this, it's just not something anyone should concern themselves with in the foreseeable future. AI that can replace a dev or designer is nowhere close to becoming a reality. Just because we have some cool demos that show some impressive capabilities in a narrow application does not mean we can extrapolate that capability to something that is many times more complex.
- hackinthebochs 4y ago
  What does nowhere close mean to you? 10 years? 50 years?
- 0F 4y ago
  I strongly and emphatically disagree. You frame it like we invented these AIs. Did we write the algorithms that actually run when it’s producing its output? Of course not, we can’t understand them let alone write them. We just sift around until we find them. So obviously the situations lends its self to surprises. Every other year we get surprised by things that all the “experts” said was 50 years off or impossible, have you forgotten already?

throwaway675309 4y ago

I mean not really, even a layman non-artist can take a look at a generated picture from DALLE and determine if it meets some set of criteria from their clients. But the reverse is not true, they won't be able to properly vet a piece of code generated by an AI since that will require technical expertise. (You could argue if the piece of code produced the requisite set of output that they would have some marginal level of confidence but they would never really know for sure without being able to understand the actual code)