3 ms·

Is programming dead? No. Is there any use learning programming? Probably. The time may come when AI can write the software for you. Someone still has to te

Is programming dead? No. Is there any use learning programming? Probably. The time may come when AI can write the software for you. Someone still has to tell it what software to write, in the right amount of detail so that they actually get the software they want. That becomes "programming". (Just as programming became writing higher-level languages rather than assembly. AI may mean we get to level up.) But even if that happens, learning programming now gives you a better feel for what's going on, and a better understanding of when the AI is talking nonsense. You're going to need both of those.

akkad33 3y ago
I don't know about your last paragraph. Continuing your assembly analogy, yes learning assembly helps you get a feel for what's happening under the hood, but does anyone learn assembly these days? Also in terms of energy consumption is there a case to be made for human programming vs AI programming? Or is there a better interface than natural language between AI and humans, given natural language is so imprecise?
- AnimalMuppet 3y ago
  Does anyone really learn assembly these days? No, not many do. They did in the 1960s, though, even after compiled languages came out. And I've used it clear into the mid-1990s, which is 40 years after the first compilers. So, for long enough to cover the rest of your career, yes, it's still worth learning how to program. The rest of your questions I do not presume to know answers to.
- BillyTheMage 3y ago
  > does anyone learn assembly these days? Yes. It's not "old language" as you see it. It's just close to the hardware. Stop letting advertising convince you of such nonsense. Same thing with C; people still learn it and it's still useful to learn. This is like thinking hammers are obsolete because we have power tools now. I also think everyone's being far too generous in calling LLMs "AI". Makes it sound like it's actually intelligent or something, which it's not. It's good at mathematically predicting next-text that looks like a human wrote it, not correctness or creativity.

akkad33 3y ago

I don't know about your last paragraph. Continuing your assembly analogy, yes learning assembly helps you get a feel for what's happening under the hood, but does anyone learn assembly these days? Also in terms of energy consumption is there a case to be made for human programming vs AI programming? Or is there a better interface than natural language between AI and humans, given natural language is so imprecise?

AnimalMuppet 3y ago
Does anyone really learn assembly these days? No, not many do. They did in the 1960s, though, even after compiled languages came out. And I've used it clear into the mid-1990s, which is 40 years after the first compilers. So, for long enough to cover the rest of your career, yes, it's still worth learning how to program. The rest of your questions I do not presume to know answers to.
BillyTheMage 3y ago
> does anyone learn assembly these days? Yes. It's not "old language" as you see it. It's just close to the hardware. Stop letting advertising convince you of such nonsense. Same thing with C; people still learn it and it's still useful to learn. This is like thinking hammers are obsolete because we have power tools now. I also think everyone's being far too generous in calling LLMs "AI". Makes it sound like it's actually intelligent or something, which it's not. It's good at mathematically predicting next-text that looks like a human wrote it, not correctness or creativity.