3 ms·

That's exactly the problem - codegen means a lot of things. You just talk about codegen and expect people to understand that you mean the AI vomit.

by aerzen 3y ago

hu3 3y ago
With regards to the article, this is in the first part of it: Codegen is the process of generating code automatically, based on a defined set of rules or specifications. There’s a wide ecosystem of codegen tools, including: - Simple code completion in an integrated development environment (IDE), like Microsoft’s IntelliSense feature - Templates for repeating code patterns, like code snippets in Figma - Visual programming and no-code tools, like Bubble - Modern AI-based codegen systems, like GitHub Copilot and Replit Ghostwriter
verdverm 3y ago
> the AI vomit You don't need to use such biased language, it only hurts your argument
- johnnyworker 3y ago
  A"I" vomit then? And how would that hurt the argument? It's not royalty where being offended in combination with power could be brought to bear. If you replace "AI vomit" with "the product of these fascinating achievements of the human mind and persistent experimentation" in a sentence, it chances not thing important about rest of the sentence.
  - verdverm 3y ago
    "vomit" is the problematic word in the context. The comment author puts their bias on display. Why should I take any arguments from an author seriously when they layer their bias on? They could have replaced "vomit" with "output" and have had a better statement This is besides the fact that they claimed I was referring only to AI output as what I mean by code gen, when I clearly listed many types of code gen. Again, they demonstrate bias and poor argumentation skills.
    - VyseofArcadia 3y ago
      I said vomit and I meant vomit. I have an opinion about this, and I intended to convey that opinion. I'm not trying to avoid the appearance of bias.
      - verdverm 3y ago
        ummm, where did you say "vomit" before this most recent comment? You've only contributed the top-level comment in this branch of the thread
        VyseofArcadia 3y ago
        > AI generated code vomit needs to be called something else. From the top level comment.
        verdverm 3y ago
        Off-by-one error for me, my bad My reply about vomit applies to you then too, showing bias always weakens your argument
        johnnyworker 3y ago
        "2 + 2 equals four" "If you add one fucking two to another two, you get the disgusting but still correct result of four" It may weaken your ability to follow the argument, but not the argument itself. It does not weaken mine so maybe you're holding it wrong.
        verdverm 3y ago
        I think you have something backwards in your logic gates, you do not get to decide if your argument is weak or strong I am now sure you're holding it wrong, you're trying to make an analogy that does not work. In the first case, an opinion is made about the quality of LLM output. Here, you are stating a mathematical fact two ways. There is nothing to debate about 2+2 being 4
hashtag-til 3y ago
I find many of recent articles and franky, many github projects, are increasingly looking desperate to grab the hype, likes and stuff. It’s not even thought provoking. Just boring blatant marketing and show off.

That's exactly the problem - codegen means a lot of things. You just talk about codegen and expect people to understand that you mean the AI vomit.

by aerzen 3y ago

That's exactly the problem - codegen means a lot of things. You just talk about codegen and expect people to understand that you mean the AI vomit.

hu3 3y ago

With regards to the article, this is in the first part of it: Codegen is the process of generating code automatically, based on a defined set of rules or specifications. There’s a wide ecosystem of codegen tools, including: - Simple code completion in an integrated development environment (IDE), like Microsoft’s IntelliSense feature - Templates for repeating code patterns, like code snippets in Figma - Visual programming and no-code tools, like Bubble - Modern AI-based codegen systems, like GitHub Copilot and Replit Ghostwriter

verdverm 3y ago

> the AI vomit You don't need to use such biased language, it only hurts your argument

johnnyworker 3y ago
A"I" vomit then? And how would that hurt the argument? It's not royalty where being offended in combination with power could be brought to bear. If you replace "AI vomit" with "the product of these fascinating achievements of the human mind and persistent experimentation" in a sentence, it chances not thing important about rest of the sentence.
- verdverm 3y ago
  "vomit" is the problematic word in the context. The comment author puts their bias on display. Why should I take any arguments from an author seriously when they layer their bias on? They could have replaced "vomit" with "output" and have had a better statement This is besides the fact that they claimed I was referring only to AI output as what I mean by code gen, when I clearly listed many types of code gen. Again, they demonstrate bias and poor argumentation skills.
  - VyseofArcadia 3y ago
    I said vomit and I meant vomit. I have an opinion about this, and I intended to convey that opinion. I'm not trying to avoid the appearance of bias.
    - verdverm 3y ago
      ummm, where did you say "vomit" before this most recent comment? You've only contributed the top-level comment in this branch of the thread
      - VyseofArcadia 3y ago
        > AI generated code vomit needs to be called something else. From the top level comment.
        verdverm 3y ago
        Off-by-one error for me, my bad My reply about vomit applies to you then too, showing bias always weakens your argument
        johnnyworker 3y ago
        "2 + 2 equals four" "If you add one fucking two to another two, you get the disgusting but still correct result of four" It may weaken your ability to follow the argument, but not the argument itself. It does not weaken mine so maybe you're holding it wrong.
        verdverm 3y ago
        I think you have something backwards in your logic gates, you do not get to decide if your argument is weak or strong I am now sure you're holding it wrong, you're trying to make an analogy that does not work. In the first case, an opinion is made about the quality of LLM output. Here, you are stating a mathematical fact two ways. There is nothing to debate about 2+2 being 4

hashtag-til 3y ago

I find many of recent articles and franky, many github projects, are increasingly looking desperate to grab the hype, likes and stuff. It’s not even thought provoking. Just boring blatant marketing and show off.