5 ms·

LLMs as they are now won't take over your job, but they are a herald for something in the future that could take your job. We aren't sure yet but the evidence i

LLMs as they are now won't take over your job, but they are a herald for something in the future that could take your job. We aren't sure yet but the evidence is compelling enough that we need to consider the possibility. I mean yeah sure it's cool that something can do all your work for you but as your boss, I wouldn't need you then would I? I mean this aspect of economic impact must be considered along with the convenient fact that it makes your job easier. I also find it hard to see how you're unimpressed? I mean yeah it's not as "impressive" as a human but but it's certainly impressive in terms of progress and potential future progress given such results have never been seen before.

devjab 4y ago
> I mean yeah sure it's cool that something can do all your work for you but as your boss, I wouldn't need you then would I? I mean this aspect of economic impact must be considered along with the convenient fact that it makes your job easier. Digitalisation is basically replacing manual tasks, so I've frankly been doing it for a decade and a half. I wouldn't mind if the AI could help me write a lot of the boring code and I'm not worried about it replacing me, because even if it makes me more efficient, I've spent 7 years in the public sector seeing how little use "no-code" solutions have been to people who can't tell IT support if their phone runs android or ios. > I also find it hard to see how you're unimpressed? The first answer I got from ChatGPT worked, but it used a library that had been deprecated for at least 2 years. Which it then explained by it's data-cutoff point being in 2021. Since then we've put effort into getting it to do things for us, where it's ranged from "well this is a pretty outdated/less efficient way to do that" to "you're outright making stuff up, aren't you?". I should've screen grapped it, but at one point, trying to get it to do some asp.versioning, it told us to use a conveniently named method on an object. Only it turned out that the method had never existed in any versions of asp.versioning. Co-pilot has been even less of a success. I've also used it for fun. I've had some discussions about books that it obviously haven't read. It's very good at pretending that its answers are correct, but it'll absolutely make stuff up. Maybe that gets better as time goes by, but a lying AI is sort of useless. On the flip-side. I'm an external examiner for CS students, and I can get it to pass most programming questions students are given. Simply by entering the exam question into it... Typically it'll give a better answer than most students will, and it'll do it in like 1 minute on the free version. So it's obviously very good at churning out results for questions that have a gazillion answers on the internet and in a much more efficient way than any "old" search engine would. It's just that when it's tasked with doing something that hasn't been done a million times before, then it sort of falls flat. I still have high hopes, that AI's will help automate a lot of the things we write. We'e seen some use of them for automating documentation, which if they can also maintain it to keep it up-to-date would be a game changer, but on a whole, they are largely unimpressive to me personally. But I'm open to be impressed by the next versions.

devjab 4y ago

> I mean yeah sure it's cool that something can do all your work for you but as your boss, I wouldn't need you then would I? I mean this aspect of economic impact must be considered along with the convenient fact that it makes your job easier. Digitalisation is basically replacing manual tasks, so I've frankly been doing it for a decade and a half. I wouldn't mind if the AI could help me write a lot of the boring code and I'm not worried about it replacing me, because even if it makes me more efficient, I've spent 7 years in the public sector seeing how little use "no-code" solutions have been to people who can't tell IT support if their phone runs android or ios. > I also find it hard to see how you're unimpressed? The first answer I got from ChatGPT worked, but it used a library that had been deprecated for at least 2 years. Which it then explained by it's data-cutoff point being in 2021. Since then we've put effort into getting it to do things for us, where it's ranged from "well this is a pretty outdated/less efficient way to do that" to "you're outright making stuff up, aren't you?". I should've screen grapped it, but at one point, trying to get it to do some asp.versioning, it told us to use a conveniently named method on an object. Only it turned out that the method had never existed in any versions of asp.versioning. Co-pilot has been even less of a success. I've also used it for fun. I've had some discussions about books that it obviously haven't read. It's very good at pretending that its answers are correct, but it'll absolutely make stuff up. Maybe that gets better as time goes by, but a lying AI is sort of useless. On the flip-side. I'm an external examiner for CS students, and I can get it to pass most programming questions students are given. Simply by entering the exam question into it... Typically it'll give a better answer than most students will, and it'll do it in like 1 minute on the free version. So it's obviously very good at churning out results for questions that have a gazillion answers on the internet and in a much more efficient way than any "old" search engine would. It's just that when it's tasked with doing something that hasn't been done a million times before, then it sort of falls flat. I still have high hopes, that AI's will help automate a lot of the things we write. We'e seen some use of them for automating documentation, which if they can also maintain it to keep it up-to-date would be a game changer, but on a whole, they are largely unimpressive to me personally. But I'm open to be impressed by the next versions.