4 ms·

> but they can't read minds I don't know who needs to hear this, but neither can humans. You've implicitly assumed here that AI systems will always be worse a

> but they can't read minds I don't know who needs to hear this, but neither can humans. You've implicitly assumed here that AI systems will always be worse at contextualizing and framing questions than the average engineer. I'm not sure that it's even true now let alone in the nebulous future. You haven't narrowed the fundamental myopia of the assumption here, just dressed it in slightly different clothing.

throwaway27448 3mo ago
> You've implicitly assumed here that AI systems will always be worse at contextualizing and framing questions than the average engineer. How would they know what to ask or contextualize if they don't know what the user wants?
- BugsJustFindMe 3mo ago
  Are you suggesting that psychic mindreading powers are real? > How would they know How would you? The answer is the same.
  - throwaway27448 3mo ago
    I don't understand what you mean. I can't build software I can't describe. If you're implying chatbots can ask their "client" what to build, good luck with that—contractors are at least liable for what they produce and have extreme incentives to ensure that their clients are happy. To the extent of refusing to build anything if they don't know what they want....
    - BugsJustFindMe 3mo ago
      > I don't understand what you mean. If you had psychic mindreading powers you would understand what I mean.
- ben_w 3mo ago
  By asking the user to explain what they want whenever there's ambiguity. Plus all the other things that software engineers generally have not learned to a professional level even if they picked up the basics on the job by osmosis, because figuring out the customer's needs (and what they'll pay you for which may be different) is the job of a business analyst, a PM, or a UX researcher, and those are different skills and two of them may come with a Business Informatics degree rather than a CompSci one. LLMs can be "eh, better than nothing" at many things, not just code.
  - throwaway27448 3mo ago
    And when an LLM runs up costs for a small company by getting them to lease a bunch of infrastructure they don't need, who can they sue? A contractor or advisor you can't hold liable is just a liability.
    - ben_w 3mo ago
      Same person they'd sue if they used any other power tool themselves and it didn't work out right. Plus, this is software "Engineering" we're talking about, which famously gets scare quotes in comparison to all the other forms of engineering because unlike them we don't have as standard things like professional liability insurance to cover serious professional errors of judgment the way someone who signs off on a bridge that collapses would have.
    - BugsJustFindMe 3mo ago
      > And when an LLM runs up costs for a small company by getting them to lease a bunch of infrastructure they don't need, who can they sue? This question is completely disconnected from reality. If you try to sue a human for proposing something more complex than what you need you will waste a lot of money and then lose the lawsuit. Also the annual cost of too much small company infrastructure is less than the cost of even a single good human engineer.

throwaway27448 3mo ago

> You've implicitly assumed here that AI systems will always be worse at contextualizing and framing questions than the average engineer. How would they know what to ask or contextualize if they don't know what the user wants?

BugsJustFindMe 3mo ago
Are you suggesting that psychic mindreading powers are real? > How would they know How would you? The answer is the same.
- throwaway27448 3mo ago
  I don't understand what you mean. I can't build software I can't describe. If you're implying chatbots can ask their "client" what to build, good luck with that—contractors are at least liable for what they produce and have extreme incentives to ensure that their clients are happy. To the extent of refusing to build anything if they don't know what they want....
  - BugsJustFindMe 3mo ago
    > I don't understand what you mean. If you had psychic mindreading powers you would understand what I mean.
ben_w 3mo ago
By asking the user to explain what they want whenever there's ambiguity. Plus all the other things that software engineers generally have not learned to a professional level even if they picked up the basics on the job by osmosis, because figuring out the customer's needs (and what they'll pay you for which may be different) is the job of a business analyst, a PM, or a UX researcher, and those are different skills and two of them may come with a Business Informatics degree rather than a CompSci one. LLMs can be "eh, better than nothing" at many things, not just code.
- throwaway27448 3mo ago
  And when an LLM runs up costs for a small company by getting them to lease a bunch of infrastructure they don't need, who can they sue? A contractor or advisor you can't hold liable is just a liability.
  - ben_w 3mo ago
    Same person they'd sue if they used any other power tool themselves and it didn't work out right. Plus, this is software "Engineering" we're talking about, which famously gets scare quotes in comparison to all the other forms of engineering because unlike them we don't have as standard things like professional liability insurance to cover serious professional errors of judgment the way someone who signs off on a bridge that collapses would have.
  - BugsJustFindMe 3mo ago
    > And when an LLM runs up costs for a small company by getting them to lease a bunch of infrastructure they don't need, who can they sue? This question is completely disconnected from reality. If you try to sue a human for proposing something more complex than what you need you will waste a lot of money and then lose the lawsuit. Also the annual cost of too much small company infrastructure is less than the cost of even a single good human engineer.