4 ms·
That... isn't writing code.
by bigstrat2003 1mo ago
That... isn't writing code.
- CamperBob2 1mo agoSigh. It's like watching somebody about to be hit by a bus. You yell, you wave your arms, but they either don't hear you, or they don't believe you. The last thing that goes through their head is a Greyhound's hood ornament.
- JoshTriplett 1mo agoYes, it is. But the important question is, which person is the one standing in front of the bus?
- CamperBob2 1mo agoThat would be bigstrat2003. He's not a big fan of updating his priors.
- JoshTriplett 1mo agoYou seem to be not picking up on the subtext here. Others are, though.
- CamperBob2 1mo agoThere is no subtext to bigstrat2003's argument, other than "I'm wrong, and I don't care." If you give persistent, repeatable instructions to a computer, you are programming it. If you disagree, you are gatekeeping. It's that simple. The most popular programming languages in 2030 will, in fact, be English and Mandarin. Deal with it and get over it. ---------------- Edit, to bcrosby95: Look up the etymology of the word 'computer'. It didn't originally have anything to do with hardware. The first computers were people, who were told what to do ("programmed") without necessarily knowing what they were working on in a big-picture sense.
- deleted 1mo ago[deleted]
- 27183 1mo ago> The most popular programming languages in 2030 will, in fact, be English and Mandarin. Deal with it and get over it. What are you willing to bet?
- CamperBob2 1mo agoI'm game. Say $1000, donated to a charity of the winner's choice? How do you want to set the bet up, and how do you think it should be decided? To be precise: I will bet that high-level programming languages won't be any less popular as a whole, but the vast majority of code will be written by AI rather than humans, working from specs written in natural language or something very close to it. What we call "source code" today will be thought of as "object code" by 2030. Something that occasionally needs to be inspected by humans, but rarely authored directly. Anyone not writing code this way had better be doing it as a hobby, because almost no one will pay for it.
- MichaelNolan 1mo agoSeems like a case for https://longbets.org/ https://longbets.org/ You and the other poster just need to find some agreeable benchmark so you can decide who won.
- CamperBob2 1mo agoGood idea, I know they've been around for a while. I just signed up under the same username in case 27183 is interested.
- 27183 1mo ago> You and the other poster just need to find some agreeable benchmark so you can decide who won. That is the hard part. I'm not sure the usage numbers we'd need to decide the outcome are public now, and I can't predict ~4yr out whether any currently available metric will continue to be available. Stack Overflow's popular language thing has been going for a while, that will probably still exist (if SO does) but do we have any reliable metrics to tell us what fraction of code is AI generated?
- andai 1mo agoReal programmers use a magnetized needle and a steady hand!
- bcrosby95 1mo agoPeople have been "writing code" like this for decades. That a programmer happens to do it doesn't turn it into writing code, no one would have made that claim 25 years ago, and people who aren't programmers wouldn't make that claim today.
- CamperBob2 1mo agopeople who aren't programmers wouldn't make that claim today How many times have you laughed at people working with HTML calling themselves "coders?" Well, now they can be. That's a GOOD thing.
- bcrosby95 1mo agoNever. It would be like laughing at people writing Prolog calling themselves coders.
- asdff 1mo agoOps analogy is like their boss claiming they write code because they told you what to work on and you wrote the code to solve your bosses problem.
- tom_alexander 1mo agoRelevant comic expressing the same idea: https://www.facebook.com/twonks/posts/great-job-/1313065984315812/ https://www.facebook.com/twonks/posts/great-job-/13130659843...