4 ms·
The problem with that theory is that writing code is easier than reading code. This is generally not the case in other professions. It is definitely not the cas
by ceeplusplus 4y ago
The problem with that theory is that writing code is easier than reading code. This is generally not the case in other professions. It is definitely not the case for an artist.
You still need correct code, and the halting problem says you can't prove whether code does what you want it to. At the end of the day, someone needs to be able to go in and fix shit the AI did wrong, and to do that you need to understand the code the AI wrote.
- tablespoon 4y ago> The problem with that theory is that writing code is easier than reading code. This is generally not the case in other professions. It is definitely not the case for an artist. > You still need correct code, and the halting problem says you can't prove whether code does what you want it to. At the end of the day, someone needs to be able to go in and fix shit the AI did wrong, and to do that you need to understand the code the AI wrote. This might have been your point, but chances are the "code the AI wrote" will be an unmaintainable mess, so "fixing it" means throwing it away and re-doing it.
- vbezhenar 4y agoThe question is how many developers will fix code after AI and how many developers will grow potatoes.