3 ms·

Yeah so, the reason people use various tools and machines in the first place is to simplify the work or everydays tasks by : 1) Making the tasks execute faster

Yeah so, the reason people use various tools and machines in the first place is to simplify the work or everydays tasks by : 1) Making the tasks execute faster 2) Getting more reliable outputs then doing this by yourself 3) Making it repeatable . The LLMs obviously dont check any of these boxes so why don´t we stop pretending that we as users are stupid and don´t know how to use them and start taking them for what they are - cute little mirages, perhaps applicable as toys of some sort, but not something we should use for serious engineering work really?

ivape 1y ago
[flagged]
- exe34 1y ago
  I take it you have bought stocks? What do you recommend?
- jsjshxnsbs 1y ago
  I'll take the L when llms can actually do my job to the level I expect. Llms can do some of my work but they are tiring they make mistakes and they absolutely get confused by a sufficiently complex and large codebase. Quite frankly, not being able to discuss the pros and the cons of a technology with other engineers absolutely hinders innovation. A lot of discoveries come out of mistakes. Stop being so small minded.
  - laterium 1y ago
    Why is the bar for it to do your job or completely replace you? It's a tool. If it makes you 5% better at your job, then great. There's a recent study showing it has 15-20% productivity benefits: not completely useless, not 10x. I hope we can have nuance in the conversation.
    - hansmayer 1y ago
      ...and then there was also a recent MIT study showing it was making everyone less productive. The bar is there because this is how all the AI grifters have been selling this technology - no less than end of work itself. Why should we not hold them accountable for over-promising and under-delivering? Or is that reserved just for the serfs?
- hansmayer 1y ago
  Stop what mate? My words are not the words of someone who ocassionally dabbles in the free ChatGPT layer - I've been paying premium tier AI tools for my entire company for a long time now. Recently we had to scale back their usage to just consulting mode, i.e. because the agent mode has gone from somewhat-useful to complete waste of time. We are now back to using them as replacement for the now entshittified search. But as you can see by my early adopting of these crap-tools, I am open-minded. I'd love to see what great new application you have built using them. But if you don't have anything to show, I'll also take some arguments, you know, like the stuff I provided in my first comment.
IanCal 1y ago
They easily check a bunch of those boxes. > why don´t we stop pretending that we as users are stupid and don´t know how to use them This is in response to someone who saw a bunch of URLs coming out of it and was surprised at a bunch of them being wrong. That's using the tool wrong. It's like being surprised that the top results in google/app store/play store aren't necessarily the best match for your query but actually adverts!
- hansmayer 1y ago
  The URLs being wrong in that specific case is one where they were using the "wrong tool". I can name you at least a dozen other cases from own experience, where too, they appear to be the wrong tool, for example for working with Terraform or for not exposing secrets by hardcoding them in the frontend. Et cetera. Many other people will have contributed thousands if not more similar but different cases. So what good are these tools then for really? Are we all really that stupid? Many of us mastered the hard problem of navigating various abstraction layers of computer over the years, only to be told, we now effing dont know how to write a few sentences in English? Come on. I'd be happy to use them in whatever specific domain they supposedly excel at. But no-one seems to be able to identify one for sure. The problem is, the folks pushing or better said, shoving down these bullshit generators down our throats are trying to sell us the promise of an "everything oracle". What did old man Altman tell us about ChatGPT 5? PhD level tool for code generation or some similar nonsense? But it turns out it only gets one metric right each time - generating a lot of text. So, essentially, great for bullshit jobs (i count some of the IT jobs as such too), but not much more.
  - IanCal 1y ago
    > Many of us mastered the hard problem of navigating various abstraction layers of computer over the years, only to be told, we now effing dont know how to write a few sentences in English? Come on. If you're trying to one shot stuff with a few sentences then yes you might be using these things wrong. I've seen people with PhDs fail to use google successfully to find things, were they idiots? If you're using them wrong you're using them wrong - I don't care how smart you are in other areas. If you can't hand off work knowing someones capabilities then that's a thing you can't do - and that's ok. I've known unbelievably good engineers who couldn't form a solid plan to solve a business problem or collaboratively work to get something done to save their life. Those are different skills. But gpt5-codex and sonnet 4 / 4.5 can solidly write code, gpt-5-pro with web search can really dig into things, and if you can manage what they can do you can hand off work to them. If you've only ever worked with juniors with a feeling of "they slow everything down but maybe someday they'll be as useful as me" then you're less likely to succeed at this. Let's do a quick overview of recent chats for me: * Identifying and validating a race condition in some code * Generating several approaches to a streaming issue, providing cost analyses of external services and complexity of 3 different approaches about how much they'd change the code * Identifying an async bug two good engineers couldn't find in a codebase they knew well * Finding performance issues that had gone unnoticed * Digging through synapse documentation and github issues to find a specific performance related issue * Finding the right MSC for a feature I wanted to use but didn't know existed - and then finding the github issue that explained how it was only half implemented and how to enable the experimental other part I needed * Building a bunch of UI stuff for a short term contract I needed, saving me a bunch of hours and the client money * Going through funding opportunities and matching them against a charity I want to help in my local area * Building a search integration for my local library to handle my kids reading challenge * Solving a series of VPN issues I didn't understand * Writing a lot of astro related python for an art project to cover the loss of some NASA images I used to have access to. > the folks pushing or better said If you don't want to trust them, don't. Also don't believe the anti-hype merchants who want to smugly say these tools can't do a god damn thing. They're trying to get attention as well.

ivape 1y ago

[flagged]

exe34 1y ago
I take it you have bought stocks? What do you recommend?
jsjshxnsbs 1y ago
I'll take the L when llms can actually do my job to the level I expect. Llms can do some of my work but they are tiring they make mistakes and they absolutely get confused by a sufficiently complex and large codebase. Quite frankly, not being able to discuss the pros and the cons of a technology with other engineers absolutely hinders innovation. A lot of discoveries come out of mistakes. Stop being so small minded.
- laterium 1y ago
  Why is the bar for it to do your job or completely replace you? It's a tool. If it makes you 5% better at your job, then great. There's a recent study showing it has 15-20% productivity benefits: not completely useless, not 10x. I hope we can have nuance in the conversation.
  - hansmayer 1y ago
    ...and then there was also a recent MIT study showing it was making everyone less productive. The bar is there because this is how all the AI grifters have been selling this technology - no less than end of work itself. Why should we not hold them accountable for over-promising and under-delivering? Or is that reserved just for the serfs?
hansmayer 1y ago
Stop what mate? My words are not the words of someone who ocassionally dabbles in the free ChatGPT layer - I've been paying premium tier AI tools for my entire company for a long time now. Recently we had to scale back their usage to just consulting mode, i.e. because the agent mode has gone from somewhat-useful to complete waste of time. We are now back to using them as replacement for the now entshittified search. But as you can see by my early adopting of these crap-tools, I am open-minded. I'd love to see what great new application you have built using them. But if you don't have anything to show, I'll also take some arguments, you know, like the stuff I provided in my first comment.

IanCal 1y ago

They easily check a bunch of those boxes. > why don´t we stop pretending that we as users are stupid and don´t know how to use them This is in response to someone who saw a bunch of URLs coming out of it and was surprised at a bunch of them being wrong. That's using the tool wrong. It's like being surprised that the top results in google/app store/play store aren't necessarily the best match for your query but actually adverts!

hansmayer 1y ago
The URLs being wrong in that specific case is one where they were using the "wrong tool". I can name you at least a dozen other cases from own experience, where too, they appear to be the wrong tool, for example for working with Terraform or for not exposing secrets by hardcoding them in the frontend. Et cetera. Many other people will have contributed thousands if not more similar but different cases. So what good are these tools then for really? Are we all really that stupid? Many of us mastered the hard problem of navigating various abstraction layers of computer over the years, only to be told, we now effing dont know how to write a few sentences in English? Come on. I'd be happy to use them in whatever specific domain they supposedly excel at. But no-one seems to be able to identify one for sure. The problem is, the folks pushing or better said, shoving down these bullshit generators down our throats are trying to sell us the promise of an "everything oracle". What did old man Altman tell us about ChatGPT 5? PhD level tool for code generation or some similar nonsense? But it turns out it only gets one metric right each time - generating a lot of text. So, essentially, great for bullshit jobs (i count some of the IT jobs as such too), but not much more.
- IanCal 1y ago
  > Many of us mastered the hard problem of navigating various abstraction layers of computer over the years, only to be told, we now effing dont know how to write a few sentences in English? Come on. If you're trying to one shot stuff with a few sentences then yes you might be using these things wrong. I've seen people with PhDs fail to use google successfully to find things, were they idiots? If you're using them wrong you're using them wrong - I don't care how smart you are in other areas. If you can't hand off work knowing someones capabilities then that's a thing you can't do - and that's ok. I've known unbelievably good engineers who couldn't form a solid plan to solve a business problem or collaboratively work to get something done to save their life. Those are different skills. But gpt5-codex and sonnet 4 / 4.5 can solidly write code, gpt-5-pro with web search can really dig into things, and if you can manage what they can do you can hand off work to them. If you've only ever worked with juniors with a feeling of "they slow everything down but maybe someday they'll be as useful as me" then you're less likely to succeed at this. Let's do a quick overview of recent chats for me: * Identifying and validating a race condition in some code * Generating several approaches to a streaming issue, providing cost analyses of external services and complexity of 3 different approaches about how much they'd change the code * Identifying an async bug two good engineers couldn't find in a codebase they knew well * Finding performance issues that had gone unnoticed * Digging through synapse documentation and github issues to find a specific performance related issue * Finding the right MSC for a feature I wanted to use but didn't know existed - and then finding the github issue that explained how it was only half implemented and how to enable the experimental other part I needed * Building a bunch of UI stuff for a short term contract I needed, saving me a bunch of hours and the client money * Going through funding opportunities and matching them against a charity I want to help in my local area * Building a search integration for my local library to handle my kids reading challenge * Solving a series of VPN issues I didn't understand * Writing a lot of astro related python for an art project to cover the loss of some NASA images I used to have access to. > the folks pushing or better said If you don't want to trust them, don't. Also don't believe the anti-hype merchants who want to smugly say these tools can't do a god damn thing. They're trying to get attention as well.