3 ms·
> This is exactly why I dread the future when people say "oh you will be able to tell the AI what to do, in normal language, and it will do it for you" If it e
by devsda 2y ago
> This is exactly why I dread the future when people say "oh you will be able to tell the AI what to do, in normal language, and it will do it for you"
If it ever comes to that, it should be close to pair programming with AI and it should allow a mix of AI generated and human written code.
Like unsafe in Rust, we should be able to say "I know what I'm doing here, stay out of my way". Then let AI verify human written parts for correctness by means of tests or any other methods.
I think we sort of do this already, but it is the humans who verify the AI generated code and I believe we are a long way from swapping the roles.
- Squeeeez 2y agoPair programming, in my case, mostly degenerates into "no, wait, don't, how about, what if, hm, if you click on the, on the, button there, no not there, left left left, the third from- yeah that one, ah right, thanks for guessing what I meant". (obviously not always, but the language center of my brain is obviously not well connected to the programming center, and I have noticed similar behavior from several other programmers). Let's hope the results are somewhat better than previous attempt ala COBOL. Regarding verification, in my opinion the foundation for current LLMs is, similar to humans, not far from total hallucinations. I am not sure if actual verification is really possible in that direction. At most "well, 99% of the others have been doing it that way for the past ten years".