3 ms·

I agree in the current state but think that's too focused on the outcomes right now. It seems more likely that a bunch of companies would perfect all those kin

by rzza 3y ago

I agree in the current state but think that's too focused on the outcomes right now. It seems more likely that a bunch of companies would perfect all those kinks because there's enough economic incentive to do so. It's similar to any disruptive technology at the beginning of an S-curve if you've read Innovator's Dilemma. At first, it just handles small niche use cases and the incumbent (software engineers) move upmarket to customers with higher demands that the disruptive technology can't satisfy (maybe the Autonomous driving software) but then the disruptive technology gets good enough as companies pour resources into developing it until it can satisfy even the higher demand customers.

BandButcher 3y ago
As much as I'd like to disagree, seeing big tech companies pour billions into ai chips/gpus... "Chips for America" i think was the news article headline i read last week about upcoming chip manufacturing subsidies. even our government is spending big $$$ on it
palata 3y ago
> It seems more likely that a bunch of companies would perfect all those kinks because there's enough economic incentive to do so. Not every problem can be solved by throwing money at it (or at all, even). Nobody knows how far AI can go. Those who invest a ton into it just hope that it will become profitable, but really they don't have a clue. It's just a big bet.
- rzza 3y ago
  We're only 1 year into this
  - palata 3y ago
    Into machine learning? I studied machine learning, and I can assure you that it was a long time ago. Waaaaaay longer than 1 year.
    - rzza 3y ago
      Into LLM code generation
    - rzza 3y ago
      Why you don't believe we'll get to state of AI being the predominant creator of complex and usable software? It seems like you're more focused on the fact that it can't handle the most complex use cases today.
      - palata 3y ago
        Because AI doesn't "understand" natural languages. Writing software is about converting some understanding of the world ("I want to be able to solve this human problem") into unambiguous specifications (usually that's a programming language). Sure, it can auto-complete such that the developer does not have to remember anything (which is arguably making developers worse at doing their job), but it cannot understand the reality of the person who will be using the program. It is already a problem with human developers who write programs that they don't use themselves, solving problems that they don't understand themselves.

by rzza 3y ago

BandButcher 3y ago

As much as I'd like to disagree, seeing big tech companies pour billions into ai chips/gpus... "Chips for America" i think was the news article headline i read last week about upcoming chip manufacturing subsidies. even our government is spending big $$$ on it

palata 3y ago

> It seems more likely that a bunch of companies would perfect all those kinks because there's enough economic incentive to do so. Not every problem can be solved by throwing money at it (or at all, even). Nobody knows how far AI can go. Those who invest a ton into it just hope that it will become profitable, but really they don't have a clue. It's just a big bet.

rzza 3y ago
We're only 1 year into this
- palata 3y ago
  Into machine learning? I studied machine learning, and I can assure you that it was a long time ago. Waaaaaay longer than 1 year.
  - rzza 3y ago
    Into LLM code generation
  - rzza 3y ago
    Why you don't believe we'll get to state of AI being the predominant creator of complex and usable software? It seems like you're more focused on the fact that it can't handle the most complex use cases today.
    - palata 3y ago
      Because AI doesn't "understand" natural languages. Writing software is about converting some understanding of the world ("I want to be able to solve this human problem") into unambiguous specifications (usually that's a programming language). Sure, it can auto-complete such that the developer does not have to remember anything (which is arguably making developers worse at doing their job), but it cannot understand the reality of the person who will be using the program. It is already a problem with human developers who write programs that they don't use themselves, solving problems that they don't understand themselves.