3 ms·

> a kind of contradicting idea of AI being really intelligent agents, but also AI needs to be checked carefully. Either they're intelligent enough to not need h

> a kind of contradicting idea of AI being really intelligent agents, but also AI needs to be checked carefully. Either they're intelligent enough to not need humans or we are changing the definitions of intelligence. Why is everyone so flummoxed by this? Your coworker is intelligent, but still needs code reviews. Why is it than whenever people think of artificial intelligence the only options they see are dumb as a rock / pure parrot, or some omniscient god? There is no intelligence on earth that falls in either of those categories, but thats the only two options people can use to visualize AI and if it not one to them it must be the other. Intelligence exists without being perfect gods. I feel like people have watched too much sci-fi.

sarchertech 1y ago
That’s the thing though coworkers don’t actually need code reviews. Years ago reviews of every code change before deployment weren’t a thing. Most of the time it was fine. Today, it’s fairly rare for a code review to find a serious bug in a PR. The majority of PRs from the majority of developers work fine. They do what they’re supposed to and they don’t bring production crashing down. That’s not close to true for AI.
JambalayaJimbo 1y ago
Rubber stamp PRs have the norm at every single place I have worked. No one has the time or mental energy for reading other’s code. Also why would we not just get another AI to do code review? It would be significantly faster and cheaper than a human, if equivalent.
proc0 1y ago
> Why is it than whenever people think of artificial intelligence the only options they see are dumb as a rock / pure parrot, or some omniscient god? That's not a bad question. I think it's because of the implications of building an autonomous intelligent agent. If it's actually intelligent then it has to understand basic instructions and also follow simple logical reasoning to avoid pitfalls, consistently. i.e., if a human artist is really good at generating art, if I ask them to please create a character with the left foot forward, it's an easy and obvious task they can do. Currently AI is really good at many things, which is great, but then it fails at simple things you would expect it to know if can do these other really hard things. This disconnect is what causes them to not be reliable, and therefore not as useful. That said, who knows we could be months away from a leap that will give them internal logical structures that will allow them to actually reason from first principles consistently every time. In my opinion, this is the leap we need in order for all of the current hype to be real.

sarchertech 1y ago

That’s the thing though coworkers don’t actually need code reviews. Years ago reviews of every code change before deployment weren’t a thing. Most of the time it was fine. Today, it’s fairly rare for a code review to find a serious bug in a PR. The majority of PRs from the majority of developers work fine. They do what they’re supposed to and they don’t bring production crashing down. That’s not close to true for AI.

JambalayaJimbo 1y ago

Rubber stamp PRs have the norm at every single place I have worked. No one has the time or mental energy for reading other’s code. Also why would we not just get another AI to do code review? It would be significantly faster and cheaper than a human, if equivalent.

proc0 1y ago

> Why is it than whenever people think of artificial intelligence the only options they see are dumb as a rock / pure parrot, or some omniscient god? That's not a bad question. I think it's because of the implications of building an autonomous intelligent agent. If it's actually intelligent then it has to understand basic instructions and also follow simple logical reasoning to avoid pitfalls, consistently. i.e., if a human artist is really good at generating art, if I ask them to please create a character with the left foot forward, it's an easy and obvious task they can do. Currently AI is really good at many things, which is great, but then it fails at simple things you would expect it to know if can do these other really hard things. This disconnect is what causes them to not be reliable, and therefore not as useful. That said, who knows we could be months away from a leap that will give them internal logical structures that will allow them to actually reason from first principles consistently every time. In my opinion, this is the leap we need in order for all of the current hype to be real.