4 ms·
Ai can work through all of those questions in number 2 and design around it. I was just doing that yesterday designing a game demo lol
by tayo42 1mo ago
Ai can work through all of those questions in number 2 and design around it.
I was just doing that yesterday designing a game demo lol
- matsemann 1mo agoWorks for a demo, but quickly stagnates. Future models may of course push the limits further, but right now it quickly goes sideways without someone knowledgeable at the helm.
- tayo42 1mo agoYou don't design things with never ending details though. If your developing a feature there's a limited scope to it. If your designing the direction of a large project you're working with higher level concepts. The point is that AI is aware of constraints and can manage a round it. You've got to keep in mind the size of a typical software project and plan. Most people aren't writing a kernel. They're writing some backend tool and need a project that fits into a couple of quarters with a handful of people at most involved.
- dan_ggggg 1mo ago[flagged]
- deleted 1mo ago[deleted]
- addandsubtract 1mo ago> The point is that AI is aware of constraints and can manage a round it. Only if you instruct it with constraints. Otherwise, it's happy to implement whatever workaround it needs. But it still takes a dev to know what those constraints are and why they're needed.
- nevertoolate 1mo agoAre you an AI?
- tayo42 1mo agoYour right to push back on that...
- lee_ars 1mo ago> Your right to push back on that... Human test passed. AIs make giant flashy mistakes. They don't fuck up basic grammar.
- dofm 1mo agoI have found it intriguingly difficult in my own tests to make LLMs deliberately fuck up grammar in any way similar to how humans do. I suppose this is actually an architectural limitation.
- ben_w 1mo agoOut of curiosity, I just tried this: write a comment about how to use ChatGPT to write a game like you're a barely literate reddit user, short answer, maximum incoherency and the result was a pretty good simulation. I tried less insulting prompts first, this did not produce a good simulation. Not perfect, gptzero.me still knew it was AI generated (tayo42 is human by the same measure), but if for some reason someone was using an LLM prompted with that pattern, I suspect it would fool me in a Turing test unless I found the keyword to force the agent to change the role it was playing.
- dofm 1mo agoRedditor is too easy. Conveying the errors typical in a Raise The Colours group on Facebook, that's the hard stuff.
- 1mo ago
- ben_w 1mo agoI have also tried developing games with them. I find them very weak at these things. Often they can't figure out how to test the thing, so "does this attempted solution even work at all?" is its guess from reading the source code, and sometimes I've even caught them writing "tests" which are a regex on the source code, not functionality. They know almost nothing about "is this solving the right problem?", they're trained to assume the user is right, not to frame-challenge. My general experience both in game and non-game projects is that it will be lazy by default rather than solving things correctly. Sometimes I spot this from their responses, other times I only notice with manual testing.
- tayo42 1mo agoThat's for code,I'm not talking about that.
- Madmallard 1mo agoI meticulously described the netcode structure for my tactics game and it's simple enough to just send over on web sockets and fable was still giving me an endless hydra of sync issues