esailija

Millions were invested in this project where they fired the expensive experts (me included) and replaced with a small army of cheap devs (which was actually more expensive and less productive than just retaining even one of the experts would have been). Couple years later the inevitable happened and the whole thing was thrown into trash. Code without anyone who understands it is just a liability.

If you don't human review anything and no human reads the codebase guess what I could do hundreds of PRs in an hour and appear the most productive while not doing any real work at all. These kind of idiotic companies sound like great places to work for as overemployed .

Intelligence is the complete opposite of an LLM. Usually the more you needed to memorize to do something the less intelligent you were considered.

It was also not considered to be a different route to the same thing, but more like fraud.

Also conceptually I could just write the weights on paper and do the billion multiplications on paper without any computer, does that mean I am the paper or the numbers or what??

Yeah that's why all models are wrong and everything ultimtately comes down to intution like supreme court's I know it when I see it.

It's just that intuition doesn't scale and a lot of common cases can be handled with models, rules, definitions etc. People continue to be confused that just adding more rules eventually solves reality but it never has anywhere for anything so continuing to believe it will is wild

In frontend it's coupling everything to specific backend urls and it's literally billion times worse. People fire up a frigging headless browser and set up backend servers to test a few microseconds of logic. You don't get to test much at all before everything takes too long and becomes too flaky.

At best solid haters/unaware will "solve" this by mocking everything, which just has a different set of problems and is just as bad. The only way to truly have actual satisfying solution is DI.

If you live paycheck to paycheck and then get a 25% salary increase, if everything else stays the same, in a year you have already saved 300% worth of your original salary vs 0%.

That is even with your unwarranted assumption that all energy use is the same and doesn't cause different adaptations. This kind of simplicity is just not happening in biology.

crashed when I clicked play campaign

Who is creating business critical function on top of something that is for entertainment purposes only (all providers have equivalent clauses)? AI tools and shovel sellers don't count as they just can just push the entertainment downstream.

TVs for consumers are sold at loss and the TV companies are making money with data and ads.

I guess the real price is 5-10x of what you pay. So only 10-20x more expensive for more apples to apples compariaon.

I mean you probably cannot even do 284882 * 282817374 in your head, let alone billions of matrix multiplications so that argument doesn't make sense. If you used a trillion square feet of paper to do the calculations as extra steps to plagiarize something then it should be treated the same as doing it with a computer.

Another way to put it:

Things that should be tightly coupled but are not is preferable to things that should not be tightly coupled but are.

I agree especially because coupling things is easier than uncoupling things.

Bigger models that Antrophic want to sell cost disproportionately more (e.g. 100% more cost for 5% performance improvement) than small models you would use locally

65-70% "programmers" never wrote code in the first place. Before AI cargo culters just copy pasted code from tutorials, stack overflow, github and so on. With AI they merely continue not writing code. Some people didn't do anything, not even copy paste, see r/overemployed although I have not checked it after AI... maybe it's no longer possible to hold a dev job without actually doing anything.

Programmers still write code. They have enough expertise from actually programming to understand that the untouched output from AI is not good enough to be professionally responsible for.

You know in the future they are just going to say it's different this time right?

They are not actually driverless, they have remote human operators for the edge cases.

I am on a flagship samsung that runs for example the Red Alert 2 browser port well.

OP is just pushing slop, the 80% part anyone gets for free. (well 20 bucks)

Yes, the first 80% of a subject is repeated everywhere (including all the misconceptions) and you cannot go deeper except if you got very lucky like found a 5 year old youtube video with 130 views or an old blog post or a downvoted reddit comment. This is what makes internet so addicting to me, the small chance of finding these hidden gems inside mountains of garbage.

Having 80% in a broad amount of subjects is basically worthless, it is the 90% and further that have value because it took luck and actual personal experience and effort to take it that far.

I didn't even have to play. Immediately after opening, some notification about rotating my phone is obscuring the instructions and I cannot read them.

> If Anthropic were not developing these models, one of many other companies would be.

"Everyone else is doing it" but even worse as nobody else is actually even doing it and you just made up that part.

Just commenting on this horrible justification trick in general.

What does "writes X% of code" even mean?

I use AI to generate code very rarely (basically replacing searching code from SO which was also rare) yet maybe 90-95% of my code is machine generated (macros, snippet engines, boilerplate generators, IDE/LSP features etc) if we define as how many characters in the source code out of all characters did I write by my hand.

Before collective AI psychosis nobody cared how much code is hand written and how much machine generated and the difference was absolutely massive between developers. There was also no guaranteed correlation between "productivity" and how much developer hand writes or actually uses their tools well and the same applies with AI usage.

> Lately I watch the machine do in a minute the thing I could have billed a morning for

Just raw code output is not really what anyone is paid for

There already existed billions of lines of code doing every possible thing imaginable that software is capable of doing and you could use all of it free of charge with the authors bending over backwards to make it as easy as possible for you to utilize.

Code that nobody understands and cannot be responsible for is just a flat out liability for the business, so these are not the same outputs.

And just going by raw numbers this would imply more than 100x productivity yet there is no tangible productivity change in big picture. 99 per 100 software devs are not fired, software is not getting better. In 600 days doing it the old way people could do any AAA game from scratch. If there is 100x improvement that should take 6 days now. Do you realize how insane even 10x sounds let alone 100x?

More is not more after a certain point. Even without AI it was already way too cheap to produce software and we built way too many things that should not be built because it wasn't worth the liabilities and other tradeoffs.

Basically software was already like food with obesity being the problem not famine. LLM is like being able to create treats and other garbage with thought, imagine what that would do to obesity. The amount of quality food created would be less than 100 years ago even though you could create infinitely more food in general.

What on earth is this. Literally the only thing that matters is are there more bugs after AI written code is allowed into the codebase at all. We all know the answer to that lol. But it's always nice to see "data" can be used to make any conclusion you need.

It isn't about small or big, it's about cohesion of the changes.

I prefer a big feature to be one big PR rather than a lot of small ones.

We had a dev do a big feature with a ton of small PRs, each one was individually impossible to review because each concern was out of scope for the small PR and "would be fixed in later PRs". Once it all came together as as whole, the big picture was a total horror show and I had to rewrite basically the whole thing.

In order to review those small PRs properly, each time I would have to read and understand all the current code so far from the beginning. Without that, each small PR individually looks OK because you won't remember the other PRs from weeks back that already duplicated what the current small PR does for example.

You are asking the wrong question. It's not about if you can do X which can be faked especially if you are given practically infinite tries and all failures are hidden.

The people who want to believe they actually reason just ignore all obvious evidence of contrary and cherry pick the times reasoning was faked well enough.

The people who don't want to believe will just take a second to understand how they work and then come up with ways to reveal they were faking all along. Like asking how many letters there are in a word lol.

It's only the people who don't want to believe that count because reality is what happens despite of what you believe.

Ironically it is any maxxing, including improbabilitymaxxing, that actually makes you a predictable and controllable machine. Such a sad waste of what could be a free will.

That's better than 99.99999% humans. Where do I put my credit card details?

Not really.

For example preliterate people have absolutely insane memory. In comparison my memory sucks. Having to use notes, look things up etc sucks. Literacy is a tradeoff but at least it can be argued to be worth it.

Then there is smartphones. This is not the same. The tradeoffs compared to pre smartphones cannot be argued to be worth it imo and I was 20 years old when they were introduced. They make society and lives worse. It's not just about not being able to use PC but your attention and social skills sucking.

Then there is AI which is even worse than smartphones. The tradeoffs are so unthinkably bad I can't really even describe it.

It actually makes sense. For any task it is completely trivial for anyone to become better than >80% humans and still easy to be better than >95%. The only problem is motivation not intelligence.

Not being able to call a function inside if block or a loop is not just javascript.