7 ms·

> Next up is demonstrating the AI is more productive with better programming languages. That actually would be pretty exciting! But, wouldn't AI be biased tow

by kagevf 2mo ago

> Next up is demonstrating the AI is more productive with better programming languages. That actually would be pretty exciting! But, wouldn't AI be biased toward more popular languages, since those will by nature of their popularity provide more sources for training material? Even still, the AI could demonstrate which algorithms or maybe patterns and techniques are more productive, in the context of the popular languages.

bobthepanda 2mo ago
That’s not necessarily a bad thing. As an example, 110v American outlet plugs are almost certainly not the most efficient way to power devices and appliances; but, because they are so standard and are good enough, using them massively eases the burden of making, buying and selling powered appliances in the US. Similar story with USB C.
- mkehrt 2mo ago
  Outlets benefit from standards, however. Every device (well kind of) uses the same few plug types, and a different plug would be a disadvantage. On the other hand, having a bunch of different languages is an advantage. People can pick the best tool for the job, and experiment with new language features.
- kagevf 2mo ago
  > That’s not necessarily a bad thing. True, and to my point, "popular" isn't necessarily "better". > because they are so standard and are good enough, using them massively eases the burden of making, buying and selling powered appliances Yes, but LLMs can do the heavy lifting when analyzing the "better programming languages" for productivity. There will be a bias toward popularity in their training sources, though.
gadflyinyoureye 2mo ago
You might be surprised. I've had an AI start spitting out none functioning python code. I've rewritten it with Go. The requirements are that every change has to pass compilation, linting and tests. Same requirements as Python. Go keeps the AI on the rails better. The compilation failing provides quick and probably better feedback than a whole dictionary of tests.
- kagevf 2mo ago
  For sure. Its code output is definitely not to be fully trusted. Oftentimes, you can point at where it made a mistake and it usually fixes it too.

by kagevf 2mo ago

bobthepanda 2mo ago

That’s not necessarily a bad thing. As an example, 110v American outlet plugs are almost certainly not the most efficient way to power devices and appliances; but, because they are so standard and are good enough, using them massively eases the burden of making, buying and selling powered appliances in the US. Similar story with USB C.

mkehrt 2mo ago
Outlets benefit from standards, however. Every device (well kind of) uses the same few plug types, and a different plug would be a disadvantage. On the other hand, having a bunch of different languages is an advantage. People can pick the best tool for the job, and experiment with new language features.
kagevf 2mo ago
> That’s not necessarily a bad thing. True, and to my point, "popular" isn't necessarily "better". > because they are so standard and are good enough, using them massively eases the burden of making, buying and selling powered appliances Yes, but LLMs can do the heavy lifting when analyzing the "better programming languages" for productivity. There will be a bias toward popularity in their training sources, though.

gadflyinyoureye 2mo ago

You might be surprised. I've had an AI start spitting out none functioning python code. I've rewritten it with Go. The requirements are that every change has to pass compilation, linting and tests. Same requirements as Python. Go keeps the AI on the rails better. The compilation failing provides quick and probably better feedback than a whole dictionary of tests.

kagevf 2mo ago
For sure. Its code output is definitely not to be fully trusted. Oftentimes, you can point at where it made a mistake and it usually fixes it too.