4 ms·
I use AI as much as possible for programming, but the specific wording "replacing" is not quite there yet. The confusing thing for people is it probably will be
by ilaksh 2y ago
I use AI as much as possible for programming, but the specific wording "replacing" is not quite there yet. The confusing thing for people is it probably will be at full replacement level within a couple of years.
The leading edge models surpass humans in some ways, but still make weird oversights routinely. I think the models will continue to get bigger and have more comprehensive world models and the remaining brittleness will go away over the next few years.
We are early on in a process that will go from only a few jobs to almost all (existing) jobs very quickly as the models and tools continue to rapidly improve.
- markus_zhang 2y agoI just pray I still have work in the next 10 years. Then I'll semi retire and get done with it.
- frank_nitti 2y agoIf there are no human software engineers, who will be legally and financially responsible for the code that is shipped into production? Will OpenAI, Anthropic et al assume responsibility for damages when critical systems fail for any of their users, or will it be the non-SWE user who gave the prompt(s)?
- ilaksh 2y agoTechnically it should be the company that is responsible.
- frank_nitti 2y agoThat is what I would assume. So, unless I am overlooking something, this seems like a very bad idea for a company to have zero engineering capability in-house who can read and validate the generated application code, test suites etc before it deploys into production where real end users could be harmed by faulty code generated by the LLM. For throwaway prototypes, coding and design assistance, I can see it being leveraged very effectively, but for mission-critical software systems I can’t see it going this route or we’ll have some very big problems incoming