4 ms·

But it is. Some knowledge and questions are simply increasingly outdated. If the (correct) answer on how to implement Fibonacci is one LLM query away, then why

But it is. Some knowledge and questions are simply increasingly outdated. If the (correct) answer on how to implement Fibonacci is one LLM query away, then why bother knowing? Why should a modern day web developer be able to write assembly code, when that is simply abstracted away? I think it will be a hot minute before nothing has to be known and all human knowledge is irrelevant, but, specially in CS, there is going to be a tremendous amount of rethinking to do, of what is actually important to know.

asddubs 2y ago
the point is that it's an easy problem that basically demonstrates you know how to write a loop (or recursion), not the sequence itself
ghssds 2y ago
Not outdated. If you know the answer on how to implement Fibonacci, you are doing it wrong. Inferring the answer from being told (or remembering) what is a Fibonacci number should be faster than asking an LLM or remembering it.
- TeMPOraL 2y ago
  > Inferring the answer from being told (or remembering) what is a Fibonacci number should be faster than asking an LLM or remembering it. Really? If I were to rank the knowledge relevant to this task in terms of importance, or relevance to programming in general, I'd rank "remembering what a Fibonacci number is" at the very bottom. Sure, it's probably important in some areas of math I'm not that familiar with. But between the fields of math and hard sciences I am familiar with, and programming as a profession, by far the biggest (if not the only) importance of Fibonacci sequence is in its recursive definition, particularly as the default introductory example of recursive computation. That's all - unless you believe in the mystic magic of the Golden Ratio nonsense, but that's another discussion entirely. Myself, I remember what the definition is, because I involuntarily memorize trivia like this, and obviously because of Fibonacci's salad joke. But I wouldn't begrudge anyone in tech for not having that definition on speed-dial for immediate recall.
  - frotaur 2y ago
    I assume in an interview you can just ask for the definition. I don't think the interview is (should be) testing for your knowledge of the Fibonacci numbers, but rather your ability to recognize precisely the recursive definition and exploit it.
  - lupusreal 2y ago
    Already knowing the Fibonacci sequence isn't relevant: > He was unable to explain to me how he would have implemented the Fibonacci sequence without chatGPT. An appropriate answer could have been "First, I look up what the Fibonacci sequence is on Wikipedia..." The interviewee failed to come up with anything other than the chatbot, e.g. failed to even ask the interviewer for the definition of the sequence, or come up with an explaination for how they could look it up themselves.
Shorel 2y ago
The answer on how to implement Fibonacci is so simple that it is used for coding interviews. Any difficult problem will take the focus out of coding and into the problem itself. See also fizz-buzz, which it is even simpler, and people still fail those interview questions.
Beretta_Vexee 2y ago
Not everyone does web dev. There are many jobs where it is necessary to have a vague idea of memory architecture. LLM are very poor in areas such as real time and industrial automation, as there is very little data available for training. Even if the LLM were good, we will always need someone to carry out tests, formal validation, etc. Nobody want to get on a plane or in a car whose critical firmware has been written by an LLM and proofread by someone incapable of writing code (don't give ideas to Boeing ). The question about Fibonacci is just a way of gently bringing up other topic.
- jstummbillig 2y ago
  My answer and example does not really care about the specifics. I see nothing mention here as something that a human inherently needs to concern themselves with, because none of these things are things that humans inherently care about. CS as a discipline is a layer between what humans want and how to make computers do these things. If todays devs are so far detached from dealing with 1s and 0s (which is not at all how it obviously had to develop) why would any of the other parts you mention be forever necessary given enough artificial intelligence? Sure, it's fun (as a discipline) for some of us, but humans inherently do not care about computer memory or testing. A good enough AI will abstract it away, to the degree that it is possible. And, I believe, it will also do a better job than any human ever did, because we are actually really, really bad at these things.
immibis 2y ago
Why should my data science team know what 1+1 is, when they can use a calculator? It's unfair to disqualify a data scientist just for not knowing what 1+1 is, right?

asddubs 2y ago

the point is that it's an easy problem that basically demonstrates you know how to write a loop (or recursion), not the sequence itself

ghssds 2y ago

Not outdated. If you know the answer on how to implement Fibonacci, you are doing it wrong. Inferring the answer from being told (or remembering) what is a Fibonacci number should be faster than asking an LLM or remembering it.

TeMPOraL 2y ago
> Inferring the answer from being told (or remembering) what is a Fibonacci number should be faster than asking an LLM or remembering it. Really? If I were to rank the knowledge relevant to this task in terms of importance, or relevance to programming in general, I'd rank "remembering what a Fibonacci number is" at the very bottom. Sure, it's probably important in some areas of math I'm not that familiar with. But between the fields of math and hard sciences I am familiar with, and programming as a profession, by far the biggest (if not the only) importance of Fibonacci sequence is in its recursive definition, particularly as the default introductory example of recursive computation. That's all - unless you believe in the mystic magic of the Golden Ratio nonsense, but that's another discussion entirely. Myself, I remember what the definition is, because I involuntarily memorize trivia like this, and obviously because of Fibonacci's salad joke. But I wouldn't begrudge anyone in tech for not having that definition on speed-dial for immediate recall.
- frotaur 2y ago
  I assume in an interview you can just ask for the definition. I don't think the interview is (should be) testing for your knowledge of the Fibonacci numbers, but rather your ability to recognize precisely the recursive definition and exploit it.
- lupusreal 2y ago
  Already knowing the Fibonacci sequence isn't relevant: > He was unable to explain to me how he would have implemented the Fibonacci sequence without chatGPT. An appropriate answer could have been "First, I look up what the Fibonacci sequence is on Wikipedia..." The interviewee failed to come up with anything other than the chatbot, e.g. failed to even ask the interviewer for the definition of the sequence, or come up with an explaination for how they could look it up themselves.

Shorel 2y ago

The answer on how to implement Fibonacci is so simple that it is used for coding interviews. Any difficult problem will take the focus out of coding and into the problem itself. See also fizz-buzz, which it is even simpler, and people still fail those interview questions.

Beretta_Vexee 2y ago

Not everyone does web dev. There are many jobs where it is necessary to have a vague idea of memory architecture. LLM are very poor in areas such as real time and industrial automation, as there is very little data available for training. Even if the LLM were good, we will always need someone to carry out tests, formal validation, etc. Nobody want to get on a plane or in a car whose critical firmware has been written by an LLM and proofread by someone incapable of writing code (don't give ideas to Boeing ). The question about Fibonacci is just a way of gently bringing up other topic.

jstummbillig 2y ago
My answer and example does not really care about the specifics. I see nothing mention here as something that a human inherently needs to concern themselves with, because none of these things are things that humans inherently care about. CS as a discipline is a layer between what humans want and how to make computers do these things. If todays devs are so far detached from dealing with 1s and 0s (which is not at all how it obviously had to develop) why would any of the other parts you mention be forever necessary given enough artificial intelligence? Sure, it's fun (as a discipline) for some of us, but humans inherently do not care about computer memory or testing. A good enough AI will abstract it away, to the degree that it is possible. And, I believe, it will also do a better job than any human ever did, because we are actually really, really bad at these things.

immibis 2y ago

Why should my data science team know what 1+1 is, when they can use a calculator? It's unfair to disqualify a data scientist just for not knowing what 1+1 is, right?