5 ms·
Frankly speaking, probably the latter. I've been using Copilot for over a year now, and obviously it makes stupid mistakes, but it sped up my general coding spe
by kredd 3y ago
Frankly speaking, probably the latter. I've been using Copilot for over a year now, and obviously it makes stupid mistakes, but it sped up my general coding speed. Now, I don't have much experience (maybe around 10ish years of programming professionally) in comparison to greybeards, but it works. Haven't used ChatGPT much, but as long as the user understands its shortcomings and reviews/refines its outputs, it's fine.
People who write code also make mistakes, yet we don't consider it "inherently risky practice". We just review others' code, tweak it, make it more appropriate for prod and voila. Same thing applies here.
- dylan604 3y ago>but as long as the user understands its shortcomings and reviews/refines its outputs, it's fine. nice caveat doing a heckuvallot of heavy lifting. i understand that we're talking about coders and sort have this inferred impression that coders will have this understanding, but...that's an awfully broad brush you've used to paint over the simple fact that most people using LLMs (in general) are not understanding this.
- MetaWhirledPeas 3y ago> the simple fact that most people using LLMs (in general) are not understanding this How do you know most people using LLMs are not understanding this?
- dylan604 3y agoBecause ChatGPT has been opened to the public
- inopinatus 3y agoPHP also lowered the bar to programming, and we got over the consequences of that. Eventually.
- tmpX7dMeXU 3y agoCan we please get back to the actual topic is hand. The author clearly says that they took measures that’d seem to imply that they have an understanding of the shortcomings of ChatGPT. You’re using this as a soapbox to cast holier than thou elitist aspersions on an imagined Everyone Else that isn’t as enlightened as you. This exact “LLMs bad and here’s why!” thread of conversation is getting so old. The fact that it always has the same few talking points is evidence enough that those indulging themselves in it have been party to these conversations before. They know how it goes. And now it’s their turn to say the same old tired and in this case largely irrelevant things to sound smart and to pat themselves on the back.
- kajaktum 3y ago> simple fact that most people using LLMs (in general) are not understanding this. And why does that matter? Plenty of people "use JavaScript without fundamental understanding of the language's inner workings" but things are fine (not). My point is, people have always misunderstood the TOOLS that they use, but I don't see the same kinds of rejection before? Yes, people use LLMs thinking it is the end of programming but you can become way, way more productive as a programmer if you use it as a TOOL. The other day I used it to create a simple Python function to generate N distinct colors. It works, it seems to work, it even suggested using hue instead of rgb since its better or whatever (so I looked it up and it is for the eye) so I just used it. Should I spent a week going on a deep dive into the human eye perception and reading up articles on this?
- inopinatus 3y agoforty years behind the keyboard or elbow-deep in a rack, beard not actually grey yet, but still, yes; those who do not adapt will be left behind.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ec109685 3y agoChatGPT Plus even better. Uses GPT-4, so much more capable.
- saiya-jin 3y agoTons of production code, even in flows directly related to money (banks, payment portals etc) are hacked together from various stack overflow posts, not always with full understanding of the shortcomings, corner cases etc. Typical is some complex regex.