4 ms·
It still cannot reason, which is the only thing useful a dev actually does. So, sorry, but I still dont feel threatened
by DontchaKnowit 1y ago
It still cannot reason, which is the only thing useful a dev actually does. So, sorry, but I still dont feel threatened
- Waterluvian 1y agoDepends what kind of dev we’re talking about. Millions of coders are just doing automaton work.
- coolcase 1y agoYeah "dev" is as informative as "sales guy" which can be anything from a used car salesman to head of sales for a large corp.
- hackyhacky 1y agoWhat is coding, if not applied reasoning?
- andsoitis 1y agothere are at least two levels of reasoning. the reasoning that makes logical decisions that do not benefit from lateral thinking. and then higher-order reasoning that is fueled by lateral thinking and motivation to achieve. this higher-order reasoning seems to require inputs that human biology provides.
- ninetyninenine 1y agoIf you can’t follow the trendline then you can’t reason yourself. Not even joking here. If that’s the bar for “reasoning” AI has already beat it.
- osigurdson 1y agoIn terms of capability, the trendline from 2020 to 2023 it is impossibly steep. From 2023 to now is much shallower based on my usage / experience with AI.
- ninetyninenine 1y agoThat's just about a yearish or more. The trendline I'm talking about is the past 15 years. But that being said, I would say the trendline is the same. LLMs were just an exponential and existential jump in progress that dwarfed anything in the last 15 years. The inevitable slow down after the blip just makes you feel as if it's become much shallower. But in reality, it's the same, and we'll have more and more break throughs.
- osigurdson 1y agoIn terms of personal impact, it looks more like a step function that starts in 2022 with incremental improvement after that. Of course, progress was being made prior to that (AlexNet, AlphaGo, Transformers, etc.) but these things didn't have much impact until ChatGPT came along. Once that landed however, things haven't perceptibly changed that much.
- necovek 1y agoIf you believe trendlines are guaranteed to remain pointing one way, can you reason?
- ninetyninenine 1y agoMaybe if you could "reason" you'll see I never said "guaranteed." Obviously the trendline points to the most probable outcome. If you HAVE to bet, bet on probability. It's the most reasonable answer.
- necovek 1y agoTrendlines are a way to represent some statistical data. Probability can help predict things with enough instances of an event — statistics are only a small part of how we establish a probability of a future event, and a core ingredient of even that small part is having a sufficiently representative sample (which "trendlines" usually don't). Eg. you can get statistics for all the winning lottery tickets from the last 5 years — that won't help you predict the next one. Stop confusing the two.
- ninetyninenine 1y agoIt’s probability. If a trending or pattern exists there’s a higher probability that the pattern continues into the future. No such pattern exists for the lottery. Stop being stupid.
- palmotea 1y ago> It still cannot reason, which is the only thing useful a dev actually does. So, sorry, but I still dont feel threatened You should feel threatened. Maybe they missed this time, but they're shooting at you, and will keep shooting at you.
- dboreham 1y agoIt's definitely reasoning. Or at least it's doing the same sort of thing as what you call reasoning. A few orders of magnitude less good at it than you, for now. But there's no bright line.
- travisjungroth 1y agoLLM’s can reason, assuming a definition of “reason” that doesn’t exclude them because of the way they do it. Not all of them and none perfectly, but they certainly have passed the threshold. Try disproving your own theory. Can you craft a problem that requires reasoning that an LLM can solve?