6 ms·

I'm coming around to the idea that in general the more bullshit something is the easier it is for AI to disrupt.

harveywi 4y ago
It is only a matter of time before ChatGPT learns how to ask: 1. What did you do yesterday? 2. What will you do today? 3. Any blockers?
- ARandomerDude 4y ago
  To which ChatGPT could respond with: 1. titles of tickets moved within the past 24 hours 2. title of ticket in progress 3. No blockers right now
  - selfhoster11 4y ago
    Not gonna lie, hooking up ChatGPT to Jira so I can query it via Slack or voice recognition would rule. It would certainly be quicker than the slow Jira UI.
    - yamtaddle 4y ago
      All these hundreds-of-GB-memory, several-seconds-to-cold-load Bugzilla knock-offs should provide a second, read-only interface that's just HTML. It'd make them almost tolerable.
  - randomdata 4y ago
    ChatGPT seems a little too clever to stick to that script, though. Soon it will learn to answer like the rest of us do: 1. What we discussed I was going to work on yesterday. 2. Continue to do my job. 3. Of course not. If I did, I would have made it known long before this.
- _huayra_ 4y ago
  They might also listen in on meetings, write a summary in a word doc that no one reads, and then adds tasks in whatever kanban one's company uses that you never look at. Product Manager-aaS
  - onemoresoop 4y ago
    They already do. I was surprised at how accurate the transcription of a recorded meeting came to be. Not sure what they used for transcription, the meeting was recorded in Teams.
- jrd259 4y ago
  The point of the DSU isn't to force the engineer to recite what they did, it's to inform the peers so people can coordinate. I also find that engineers are reluctant to admit being blocked or to ask for help at all. My team gets value from the DSU. I'm sorry if you think the DSU (or the role of SDM) is so useless that it ought to be automated away.
ryanklee 4y ago
Hmmm, I suppose I'm interested in what you mean by bullshit. Just because AI makes something easier to do, doesn't mean the work is bullshit. Lots of research, composition, and communication work becomes much easier to do with an AI assist, but that doesn't mean the work is bullshit.
- ARandomerDude 4y ago
  > I'm coming around to the idea that in general the more bullshit something is the easier it is for AI to disrupt. > in general
  - ryanklee 4y ago
    Sorry, but I don't see how this is a clarifying response. Research, composition, and communication are a big chunk of what ChatGPT is good at assisting. I don't know enough to claim that it /is/ the general case, but it's very likely not a minority. And if that's the case, and these activities are not /essentially/ bullshit, then I'm still wondering how AI disruption can be claimed to be a reliable signal of bullshit.
randomdata 4y ago
Yet when AI learned to wash dishes in the home (among other tasks), freeing up a homemaker's time to join the workforce, it seems the labor market absorbed the influx in people largely by creating bullshit jobs.
- lm28469 4y ago
  > Yet when AI learned to wash dishes A pump, a motor and a timer
- whimsicalism 4y ago
  Let's not use "AI" to mean "machines."
  - randomdata 4y ago
    Certainly not. Indeed, all AIs are machines, but not all machines are AI. The kitchen faucet that preceeded the dish washer as the primary tool used to wash dishes is a machine, but has no intelligence. The dish washer expanded upon the concept of the kitchen faucet by adding artificial intelligence to it.
    - krustyburger 4y ago
      By that logic a sprinkler system is “artificial intelligence” when compared to a garden hose. That’s not what the term means.
      - randomdata 4y ago
        That's exactly what artificial intelligence means... There is a secondary definition of AI that says basically an AI is anything that we haven't yet figured out how to do. Once we figure out how to do it, it ceases to be AI. Indeed, terms can and do have multiple meanings, but I'm not sure that secondary definition fits the topic of discussion.
        4y ago

It is only a matter of time before ChatGPT learns how to ask: 1. What did you do yesterday? 2. What will you do today? 3. Any blockers?

ARandomerDude 4y ago
To which ChatGPT could respond with: 1. titles of tickets moved within the past 24 hours 2. title of ticket in progress 3. No blockers right now
- selfhoster11 4y ago
  Not gonna lie, hooking up ChatGPT to Jira so I can query it via Slack or voice recognition would rule. It would certainly be quicker than the slow Jira UI.
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    All these hundreds-of-GB-memory, several-seconds-to-cold-load Bugzilla knock-offs should provide a second, read-only interface that's just HTML. It'd make them almost tolerable.
- randomdata 4y ago
  ChatGPT seems a little too clever to stick to that script, though. Soon it will learn to answer like the rest of us do: 1. What we discussed I was going to work on yesterday. 2. Continue to do my job. 3. Of course not. If I did, I would have made it known long before this.
_huayra_ 4y ago
They might also listen in on meetings, write a summary in a word doc that no one reads, and then adds tasks in whatever kanban one's company uses that you never look at. Product Manager-aaS
- onemoresoop 4y ago
  They already do. I was surprised at how accurate the transcription of a recorded meeting came to be. Not sure what they used for transcription, the meeting was recorded in Teams.
jrd259 4y ago
The point of the DSU isn't to force the engineer to recite what they did, it's to inform the peers so people can coordinate. I also find that engineers are reluctant to admit being blocked or to ask for help at all. My team gets value from the DSU. I'm sorry if you think the DSU (or the role of SDM) is so useless that it ought to be automated away.

ryanklee 4y ago

Hmmm, I suppose I'm interested in what you mean by bullshit. Just because AI makes something easier to do, doesn't mean the work is bullshit. Lots of research, composition, and communication work becomes much easier to do with an AI assist, but that doesn't mean the work is bullshit.

ARandomerDude 4y ago
> I'm coming around to the idea that in general the more bullshit something is the easier it is for AI to disrupt. > in general
- ryanklee 4y ago
  Sorry, but I don't see how this is a clarifying response. Research, composition, and communication are a big chunk of what ChatGPT is good at assisting. I don't know enough to claim that it /is/ the general case, but it's very likely not a minority. And if that's the case, and these activities are not /essentially/ bullshit, then I'm still wondering how AI disruption can be claimed to be a reliable signal of bullshit.

randomdata 4y ago

Yet when AI learned to wash dishes in the home (among other tasks), freeing up a homemaker's time to join the workforce, it seems the labor market absorbed the influx in people largely by creating bullshit jobs.

lm28469 4y ago
> Yet when AI learned to wash dishes A pump, a motor and a timer
whimsicalism 4y ago
Let's not use "AI" to mean "machines."
- randomdata 4y ago
  Certainly not. Indeed, all AIs are machines, but not all machines are AI. The kitchen faucet that preceeded the dish washer as the primary tool used to wash dishes is a machine, but has no intelligence. The dish washer expanded upon the concept of the kitchen faucet by adding artificial intelligence to it.
  - krustyburger 4y ago
    By that logic a sprinkler system is “artificial intelligence” when compared to a garden hose. That’s not what the term means.
    - randomdata 4y ago
      That's exactly what artificial intelligence means... There is a secondary definition of AI that says basically an AI is anything that we haven't yet figured out how to do. Once we figure out how to do it, it ceases to be AI. Indeed, terms can and do have multiple meanings, but I'm not sure that secondary definition fits the topic of discussion.
      - 4y ago