5 ms·

I don't really understand the sentiment that the web jobs are going away. Web/mobile and supporting technology has only risen in relevance. ML has some narrow u

by danaur 8y ago

I don't really understand the sentiment that the web jobs are going away. Web/mobile and supporting technology has only risen in relevance. ML has some narrow use cases where it can solve some interesting problems or eek out some additional efficiency, but I don't see programming move towards it.

snodnipper 8y ago
as a mobile dev, I have been considering this with some UX folks. Few things going for AI/ML - conversation interfaces should be far cheaper/quicker to produce in comparison to traditional app development. Furthermore, talking and touch are natural ways to interact (e.g. pointing on a map whilst talking) vs endless long presses and menu items. Whilst I have been involved in Android since the beginning I personally would not encourage younger folks to focus too much at the expense of new technologies (inc. blockchain tech for that matter). That said, we hopefully have another 10 years!
- mbreese 8y ago
  That’s a good point. The interface between the user and the computer has been dominated recently by web apps and mobile. Historically, it was native GUIs. But, I could totally see AI/ML driving voice interfaces in the future.
  - 52-6F-62 8y ago
    I recently bought myself an Apple Watch. I’m not sure I would have agreed before using this thing. I mean maybe for people for whom computers were too foreign, or for those who grew up with no other options... But no, I’ve been enjoying the experience more and more. Texting my girlfriend by voice. Asking Siri to find something on a map for me. First time I’ve been impressed by the pragmatic nature of it and not just finding it a clever toy (at least in some time). I’m still wary of some of the implications, but I’m cautiously optimistic now more than I would have been. That said, it’s certainly not my area of expertise so I’m also wary it spells my own career doom if I don’t get smart.
- mattlondon 8y ago
  Voice and speech stuff isn't going to work in today's work environments. Can you imagine an open office full of people jabbering away to their computers? I guess voice printing will to some extent prevent other people "highjacking" your computer while trying to control theirs, but the noise would be extreme. For certain industries - e.g. tech - people like quiet to concentrate. Not unique to tech of course... libraries are quiet too for the same reason. I cant imagine the average office where concentration is required benefiting from a call-centre-esque environment where everyone is talking out loud. .. but I guess it might mean we can get away from open offices and back to private offices?! :-)
  - sdenton4 8y ago
    One could imagine responding to subsonic commands, though, with a microphone in contact with the throat... I can't imagine using it for programming, but could be cool for quick navigation.
    - antidesitter 8y ago
      Perhaps you can skip the vocal system entirely and go straight to EEG (assuming we manage to improve the signal-to-noise ratio).
  - melling 8y ago
    Yeah, there’s always a guy in one of these conversations that can’t imagine working in an office with people talking to their computers. I guess you get to be that guy this time. The other guy is the one who will never talk in public to a computer. Finally, you have the guy who can’t imagine not using a keyboard to program. For the rest of us, we have no problem talking to our computers, and we anxiously await the future to arrive.
  - snodnipper 8y ago
    sure - as part of the presentation, the UX guy also demo'ed something like botsociety.io. Essentially, he had a Facebook chat bot with buttons to hint what is possible (leading the conversation). That sort of interaction could be likened to messaging them versus talking to them...and perfectly suitable for an office or where you don't want to broadcast certain info. So whilst ChatOps might be fairly basic today I am open to it becoming very much more advanced in the coming years.
- orange222 8y ago
  But voice conveniently leaves out exposing to users the capabilities of the software. Have fun exploring all the features Google maps has by barking at the app where 99% of your commands are rejected.
  - snodnipper 8y ago
    pretty sure folks will be able to just ask what it can do...and the response could of course look like a man page where folks can drill down further. I don't think we necessarily need to think the interactions will exclude a screen...but of course they could depending on the hardware / situation...today that activity might be driving...but perhaps we won't be driving all that much by the time this tech has advanced sufficiently.
wycs 8y ago
Web development feels AI complete to me. In the sense that it would take human level AI to do. However, chess felt AI complete to Kasparov.
- yters 8y ago
  Kasparov found out AI+human is better than AI or human alone when he held an AI vs human vs AI+human tournament.
  - wycs 8y ago
    This is no longer the case; human computer hybrids are no longer competitive in chess. From Wikipedia: Computer chess engine Zor won the freestyle 2017 Ultimate Challenge tournament. The best human plus computer came in 3rd place. In 2017, chess computer engines are superior to human plus computers.
    - yters 8y ago
      Well, it's a finite space, and with a big enough lookup table then a chess engine will always win.
      - pedrosorio 8y ago
        If you're truly not aware of the issues with optimizing problems in "finite spaces", I recommend you take an online course in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combinatorial_optimization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combinatorial_optimization
        derangedHorse 8y ago
        His argument still stands. The fact that combinatorial optimization is difficult doesn't change the fact that the problem space is finite and can theoretically be enumerated by a very fast computer with lots of space. This also means that the heuristics that are typically used (that dramatically reduce the problem space at a rate tied to the size of the problem) can make the exploration of potential solutions much easier than it once was.

by danaur 8y ago

snodnipper 8y ago

as a mobile dev, I have been considering this with some UX folks. Few things going for AI/ML - conversation interfaces should be far cheaper/quicker to produce in comparison to traditional app development. Furthermore, talking and touch are natural ways to interact (e.g. pointing on a map whilst talking) vs endless long presses and menu items. Whilst I have been involved in Android since the beginning I personally would not encourage younger folks to focus too much at the expense of new technologies (inc. blockchain tech for that matter). That said, we hopefully have another 10 years!

mbreese 8y ago
That’s a good point. The interface between the user and the computer has been dominated recently by web apps and mobile. Historically, it was native GUIs. But, I could totally see AI/ML driving voice interfaces in the future.
- 52-6F-62 8y ago
  I recently bought myself an Apple Watch. I’m not sure I would have agreed before using this thing. I mean maybe for people for whom computers were too foreign, or for those who grew up with no other options... But no, I’ve been enjoying the experience more and more. Texting my girlfriend by voice. Asking Siri to find something on a map for me. First time I’ve been impressed by the pragmatic nature of it and not just finding it a clever toy (at least in some time). I’m still wary of some of the implications, but I’m cautiously optimistic now more than I would have been. That said, it’s certainly not my area of expertise so I’m also wary it spells my own career doom if I don’t get smart.
mattlondon 8y ago
Voice and speech stuff isn't going to work in today's work environments. Can you imagine an open office full of people jabbering away to their computers? I guess voice printing will to some extent prevent other people "highjacking" your computer while trying to control theirs, but the noise would be extreme. For certain industries - e.g. tech - people like quiet to concentrate. Not unique to tech of course... libraries are quiet too for the same reason. I cant imagine the average office where concentration is required benefiting from a call-centre-esque environment where everyone is talking out loud. .. but I guess it might mean we can get away from open offices and back to private offices?! :-)
- sdenton4 8y ago
  One could imagine responding to subsonic commands, though, with a microphone in contact with the throat... I can't imagine using it for programming, but could be cool for quick navigation.
  - antidesitter 8y ago
    Perhaps you can skip the vocal system entirely and go straight to EEG (assuming we manage to improve the signal-to-noise ratio).
- melling 8y ago
  Yeah, there’s always a guy in one of these conversations that can’t imagine working in an office with people talking to their computers. I guess you get to be that guy this time. The other guy is the one who will never talk in public to a computer. Finally, you have the guy who can’t imagine not using a keyboard to program. For the rest of us, we have no problem talking to our computers, and we anxiously await the future to arrive.
- snodnipper 8y ago
  sure - as part of the presentation, the UX guy also demo'ed something like botsociety.io. Essentially, he had a Facebook chat bot with buttons to hint what is possible (leading the conversation). That sort of interaction could be likened to messaging them versus talking to them...and perfectly suitable for an office or where you don't want to broadcast certain info. So whilst ChatOps might be fairly basic today I am open to it becoming very much more advanced in the coming years.
orange222 8y ago
But voice conveniently leaves out exposing to users the capabilities of the software. Have fun exploring all the features Google maps has by barking at the app where 99% of your commands are rejected.
- snodnipper 8y ago
  pretty sure folks will be able to just ask what it can do...and the response could of course look like a man page where folks can drill down further. I don't think we necessarily need to think the interactions will exclude a screen...but of course they could depending on the hardware / situation...today that activity might be driving...but perhaps we won't be driving all that much by the time this tech has advanced sufficiently.

wycs 8y ago

Web development feels AI complete to me. In the sense that it would take human level AI to do. However, chess felt AI complete to Kasparov.

yters 8y ago
Kasparov found out AI+human is better than AI or human alone when he held an AI vs human vs AI+human tournament.
- wycs 8y ago
  This is no longer the case; human computer hybrids are no longer competitive in chess. From Wikipedia: Computer chess engine Zor won the freestyle 2017 Ultimate Challenge tournament. The best human plus computer came in 3rd place. In 2017, chess computer engines are superior to human plus computers.
  - yters 8y ago
    Well, it's a finite space, and with a big enough lookup table then a chess engine will always win.
    - pedrosorio 8y ago
      If you're truly not aware of the issues with optimizing problems in "finite spaces", I recommend you take an online course in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combinatorial_optimization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combinatorial_optimization
      - derangedHorse 8y ago
        His argument still stands. The fact that combinatorial optimization is difficult doesn't change the fact that the problem space is finite and can theoretically be enumerated by a very fast computer with lots of space. This also means that the heuristics that are typically used (that dramatically reduce the problem space at a rate tied to the size of the problem) can make the exploration of potential solutions much easier than it once was.