5 ms·
"I think people writing all this should stop and try GPT4." Have you? I mean, for something that's actually useful beyond just simple stuff, like at your job
by redleggedfrog 4y ago
"I think people writing all this should stop and try GPT4." Have you? I mean, for something that's actually useful beyond just simple stuff, like at your job where it's going to matter? Because for what I'm doing which is custom ERP/Website data flows to/from legacy systems it's mostly a time sink and offers little value.
- throwuwu 4y agoPretty much by definition its not going to be good at highly custom or uncommon programming tasks since it won’t have seen many examples to generalize from. I doubt you could get better results from a freshly hired human either.
- mdp2021 4y ago> from a freshly hired human either But the human will learn, through reasoning and challenges... Those features of which some wonder whether they will emerge are critical pieces.
- pmoriarty 4y ago"But the human will learn" That depends on the human, what they're trying to learn, and how it's taught to them. Some people with brain damage, learning disabilities, other cognitive issues, with poor teachers or learning materials, or with too difficult a task will not learn. It might be useful to view AIs as akin in some ways to brain damaged humans, who might be good at some tasks but deficient at others.
- hajile 4y agoThose people also won’t be hired as coders. There are other things that they will excel at.
- redleggedfrog 4y agoLOL! You got that right! They don't.
- crop_rotation 4y agoI have tried it for actually useful things and it does work. e.g. I have used it to write several zsh and neovim snippets for QoL improvements (things that I always wanted but was too lazy too write). I even used it to suggest and make some changes to CPython Internals for some features I wanted to add to python for fun. It is very possible it utterly fails on homegrown (non public) software stacks. But it is still very useful. I have used it for many non software things as well, and again very useful.
- redleggedfrog 4y agoOkay, that makes more sense to me. But those seem like "toy" things to throw ChatGTP at (not dismissing their usefulness or their importance to you, just that they are fairly simple things [and maybe I'm wrong here, I have not written zsh - I googled it just now]). I think my needs are too specific, and often too nebulous. Also, just a bit chapped about falling for the hype.
- yunyu 4y agoWith ever growing context windows, you can upload your entire codebase (or at least the public API) in the prompt and have the model reason off of that.
- musha68k 4y agoI tried it as well and it was a net negative to my productivity (the output is also very slow). I guess the use case needs to be much more specific / rote / patterned. I didn’t find the sweet spot for what I’m personally doing on a daily basis. It was interesting to get into though. I have a hunch it’s much better suited to get context specific summaries for further good old “RTFM”. And that in itself would be cool enough if people would actually go and “fact check” the outputs which I guess (and telling from comments) is often not the case.
- IanCal 4y agoHow are you using it? Have you tried few-shot tasks where you give it a bunch of examples? I'm having it generate ember templates that use a custom framework correctly first time by just giving it a load of examples then asking it to do the same. It's absolutely cheaper to have it do the work compared to me.
- fauxpause_ 4y agoI had it walk me through setting up AWS
- bmikaili 4y agoYou are prompting it wrong. I guarantee you that if you gave it the shape of your inputs, your desired output, and good documentation on what you use / how you have solved similar problems, maybe some info on the legacy system or examples it will extrapolate remarkably well. It is important to use it well.