4 ms·
> 95% accurate, 99% accurate, and 99.9% accurate are all aweful in this context. Really? What exactly is the bar then? I'd say most professionals I know hover
by johnfn 4y ago
> 95% accurate, 99% accurate, and 99.9% accurate are all aweful in this context.
Really? What exactly is the bar then? I'd say most professionals I know hover somewhere between 95% and 99%.
- lupire 4y agoWhat is the denominator? Lines of code? Functions?
- iudqnolq 4y agoAssume it's per invocation, and each invocation generates a few dozen line function. How many such functions do you write when you get in the groove? If you multiply it out, you'll probably end up expecting a few bugs a day at 95%, similar to most humans might write. Except you're pretty used to the sorts of bugs you write, and the AI isn't you. So these bugs will be harder to find. So why is this better than writing by hand? Most of the hard work of programming is figuring out specs and debugging, not banging out well understood and specced implementations.
- 8n4vidtmkvmk 4y agowat? who's using the results without reading it and writing tests? not many bugs should be slipping by