4 ms·

It'll happen gradually over time, with more pressure on programmers to "get more done". I think it's useful to look at what has already happened at another, mu

It'll happen gradually over time, with more pressure on programmers to "get more done". I think it's useful to look at what has already happened at another, much smaller profession -- translators -- as a precursor to what will happen with programmers. 1. translation software does a mediocre job, barely useful as a tool; all jobs are safe 2. translation software does a decent job, now expected to be used as time-saving aid, expectations for translators increase, fewer translators needed/employed 3. translation software does a good job, translators now hired to proofread/check the software output rather than translate themselves, allowing them to do 3x to 4x as fast as before, requiring proportionally fewer translators 4. translation software, now driven by LLMs, does an excellent job, only cursory checks required; very few translators required mostly in specialized cases

Workaccount2 2y ago
I actually know a professional translator and while a year ago he was full of worry, he now is much more relaxed about it. It turns out that like art, many people just want a human doing the translation. There is a strong romantic element to it, and it seems humans just have a strong natural inclination to only want other humans facilitating communication.
- arrowsmith 2y ago
  How do they know that a human is doing the translation? What's to stop someone from just c&ping the text into an LLM, giving it a quick proofread, then sending it back to the client and saying "I translated this"? Sounds like easy money, maybe I should get into the translation business.
  - Workaccount2 2y ago
    I mean, they don't, but I can assure you there are far more profitable ways to be deceptive than being a faux translator haha
  - skydhash 2y ago
    The fact that the client is actually going to use the text and they will not find it funny when they're being laughed at. Or worse, being sued because of some situation caused by a confusion. I read Asian novels and you can quickly (within a chapter) discern if the translators have done a good job (And there's so many translation notes if the author relies on cultural elements).
  - insane_dreamer 2y ago
    1) almost all clients hire a translation agency who then farms then work out to freelance translators; payment is on a per-source-word basis. 2) the agency encourages translation tools, so long as the final content is okay (proofread by the translator), because they can then pay less (based on the assumption that it should take you less time). I’ve see rates drop in half because of it. 3) the client doesn’t know who did the translation and doesn’t care - with the exception of literary pieces where the translator might be credited on the book. (Those cases typically won’t go through an agency)
- insane_dreamer 2y ago
  I’ve done freelance translating (not my day job) for 20 years. What you describe is true for certain types of specialized translations, particularly anything that is literary in nature. But that is a very small segment. The vast majority of translation work is commercial in nature and for that companies don’t care whether a human or machine did it.
aksosnckckd 2y ago
The hard part of development isn’t converting an idea in human speak to idea in machine speak. It’s formulating that idea in the first place. This spans all the way from high level “tinder for dogs” concepts to low level technical concepts. Once AI is doing that, most jobs are at risk. It’ll create robots to do manual labor better than humans as well.
- insane_dreamer 2y ago
  Right. But it only takes 1 person, or maybe a handful, to formulate an idea that might take 100 people to implement. You will still need that one person but not the 100.
daveguy 2y ago
Yes, but in all 4 of these steps you are literally describing the job transformer LLMs were designed to do. We are at 1 (mediocre job) for LLMs in coding right now. Maybe 2 in a few limited cases (eg boilerplate). There's no reason to assume LLMs will ever perform at 3 for coding. For the same reason natural language programming languages like COBOL are no longer used -- natural language is not precise.
- insane_dreamer 2y ago
  It seems the consensus is that we will reach level 3 pretty quickly given the pace of development in the past 2 years. Not sure about 4 but I’d say in 10 years we’ll be there.
  - daveguy 2y ago
    There is definitely no consensus that we will reach level 3 in coding tasks "pretty quickly". (Assuming you are talking about your own definitions of "levels" wrt translation applied to coding -- only proofread/check required)
weatherlite 2y ago
> It'll happen gradually over time How much time? I totally agree with you but being early is the same as being wrong as someone clever once said. There's a huge difference between it happening in less than 5 years like Zuckerberg and Sam Altman are saying and it taking 20 more years. If the second scenario is what happens me and many people on this thread can probably retire rather comfortably, and humanity possibly has enough time to come up with a working system to handle this mass change. If the first scenario happens it's gonna be very very painful for many people.
- jajko 2y ago
  20 years as in real replacement, maybe. But change will be cca gradual if looking at whole market, even if composed of many smaller jumps. Top management of companies are now itching for that promised paradise of minimal IT with just few experts. Then comes inevitable sobering up, but the direction is clear. I wouldn't be considering programming if choosing university studies now. With that smart, many other fields look more stable, albeit demand curve and how comfy later years of career looks like is very different (maybe lawyers, doctors, for blue collars some trades but look at long term health effects with ie back or knee issues).

Workaccount2 2y ago

I actually know a professional translator and while a year ago he was full of worry, he now is much more relaxed about it. It turns out that like art, many people just want a human doing the translation. There is a strong romantic element to it, and it seems humans just have a strong natural inclination to only want other humans facilitating communication.

arrowsmith 2y ago
How do they know that a human is doing the translation? What's to stop someone from just c&ping the text into an LLM, giving it a quick proofread, then sending it back to the client and saying "I translated this"? Sounds like easy money, maybe I should get into the translation business.
- Workaccount2 2y ago
  I mean, they don't, but I can assure you there are far more profitable ways to be deceptive than being a faux translator haha
- skydhash 2y ago
  The fact that the client is actually going to use the text and they will not find it funny when they're being laughed at. Or worse, being sued because of some situation caused by a confusion. I read Asian novels and you can quickly (within a chapter) discern if the translators have done a good job (And there's so many translation notes if the author relies on cultural elements).
- insane_dreamer 2y ago
  1) almost all clients hire a translation agency who then farms then work out to freelance translators; payment is on a per-source-word basis. 2) the agency encourages translation tools, so long as the final content is okay (proofread by the translator), because they can then pay less (based on the assumption that it should take you less time). I’ve see rates drop in half because of it. 3) the client doesn’t know who did the translation and doesn’t care - with the exception of literary pieces where the translator might be credited on the book. (Those cases typically won’t go through an agency)
insane_dreamer 2y ago
I’ve done freelance translating (not my day job) for 20 years. What you describe is true for certain types of specialized translations, particularly anything that is literary in nature. But that is a very small segment. The vast majority of translation work is commercial in nature and for that companies don’t care whether a human or machine did it.

aksosnckckd 2y ago

The hard part of development isn’t converting an idea in human speak to idea in machine speak. It’s formulating that idea in the first place. This spans all the way from high level “tinder for dogs” concepts to low level technical concepts. Once AI is doing that, most jobs are at risk. It’ll create robots to do manual labor better than humans as well.

insane_dreamer 2y ago
Right. But it only takes 1 person, or maybe a handful, to formulate an idea that might take 100 people to implement. You will still need that one person but not the 100.

daveguy 2y ago

Yes, but in all 4 of these steps you are literally describing the job transformer LLMs were designed to do. We are at 1 (mediocre job) for LLMs in coding right now. Maybe 2 in a few limited cases (eg boilerplate). There's no reason to assume LLMs will ever perform at 3 for coding. For the same reason natural language programming languages like COBOL are no longer used -- natural language is not precise.

insane_dreamer 2y ago
It seems the consensus is that we will reach level 3 pretty quickly given the pace of development in the past 2 years. Not sure about 4 but I’d say in 10 years we’ll be there.
- daveguy 2y ago
  There is definitely no consensus that we will reach level 3 in coding tasks "pretty quickly". (Assuming you are talking about your own definitions of "levels" wrt translation applied to coding -- only proofread/check required)

weatherlite 2y ago

> It'll happen gradually over time How much time? I totally agree with you but being early is the same as being wrong as someone clever once said. There's a huge difference between it happening in less than 5 years like Zuckerberg and Sam Altman are saying and it taking 20 more years. If the second scenario is what happens me and many people on this thread can probably retire rather comfortably, and humanity possibly has enough time to come up with a working system to handle this mass change. If the first scenario happens it's gonna be very very painful for many people.

jajko 2y ago
20 years as in real replacement, maybe. But change will be cca gradual if looking at whole market, even if composed of many smaller jumps. Top management of companies are now itching for that promised paradise of minimal IT with just few experts. Then comes inevitable sobering up, but the direction is clear. I wouldn't be considering programming if choosing university studies now. With that smart, many other fields look more stable, albeit demand curve and how comfy later years of career looks like is very different (maybe lawyers, doctors, for blue collars some trades but look at long term health effects with ie back or knee issues).