3 ms·
> Models are starting to get good at ambiguity That's fair, and something I've observed too. I wish I had written "the rest of us shouldn't freak out and quit
by momojo 5mo ago
> Models are starting to get good at ambiguity
That's fair, and something I've observed too. I wish I had written "the rest of us shouldn't freak out and quit software today".
But here's another data point: At the biotech I work for, writing good code has never been the bottleneck. I actually told my boss that a paid Claude vs free subscription wouldn't be that much value because even if it took every piece of code or algorithm we've ever written and 10x-ed the hell out of them, we'd still be bottlenecked by the biology and physics which dictates that we wait 24 days for our histology assay pipeline.
I have a hunch most fields outside of software are this way. And I'm personally not planning to quit anytime soon.
- poisonfountain 5mo agoOk, but you job is clearly not a good sample for a "job most mortals work on".
- momojo 5mo ago1. I admit my job is not a good sample of 'job most mortals work' 2. I still think 'most mortals' software devs aren't Antirez, and work in industries or fields that still require a human to bridge the ambiguity gap.
- DoctorOetker 5mo agoEverybody likes to think their job or specialization is the bottleneck. I think the domain knowledge and scientific knowledge is more often the bottleneck than people like to admit. Sure it doesn't take a lot of knowledge to repeat or automate what the previous generations did, but such decisions were very far from the optimum considering the actual scientific frontier.