WendyTheWillow

30 ms·

451.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
Do you realize I'm not disagreeing with you about the difference between 3 and 4? Reread what I wrote. I contrasted 3 and 4 with 2 and 3, which you seem to be entirely ignoring. 3 and 4 could be worlds apart, but wouldn't matte
452.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
It doesn't work well enough yet. The flashcards it generates don't actually fit well into its own ecosystem. When you try to build the "quizzes", the wrong answers are trivially spottable. Further, even the generated
453.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
Er, why did you rewrite what I wrote but then pretend like it was a quote? That's a really weird way to reply! But to address your point, my "bar" is that OpenAI's ChatGPT fails to solve problems for me on a many-times-
454.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
Firstly no, the gap between 3 and 4 is not anything as large as the gap between 2 and 3. Secondly, nothing you said here changed as of this announcement. Nothing here makes it any more or less likely LLMs will risk software engineering j
455.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
Yep, and I could have done that 5 years ago. My point is that I run into problems on a daily basis that the current ChatGPT is not capable of handling on its own, without meaningful interaction with me, a software engineer.
456.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
What actually was the innovation in LLMs that produced the kind of AI we're seeing now? Is that innovation ongoing or did it happen, and now we're seeing the various optimizations of that innovation? Is voice and image integratio
457.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
I don’t think any of this materially changes job outlook for software development over the next decade. I use ChatGPT daily for school, and used Copilot daily for software development; it gets a lot wrong a lot of the time, and can’t retain
458.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
What? Not related to this conversation at all.
459.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
It’s sad to me you don’t think an engineer was involved in your story.
460.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
You didn't assert a position because you have no expertise from which your evaluation would mean anything. Nobody cares if a random person off the street thinks a bridge looks sturdy.
461.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
The fact that even your personal anecdote isn't "as serious" kind of proves my point...
462.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
Yeah, the fact that you can’t realize your example still rounds to zero is kind of sad, honestly. Nobody has been cancelled randomly, and I genuinely pity people who go through life fearful such a thing could happen to them.
463.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
Cool; briefly, can you describe your credentials? Why should anyone care what you think about this study?
464.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
They just mailed me a new ID with the updated address in VA when I requested, was a lot less of a pain than having government documents that are wrong, imo.
465.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
That’s the literal definition of credibility firstly, and secondly if 120 people and covid were properly controlled for, neither of these facts invalidates the study. You can find statistically valid conclusions from 120 people, for sure.
466.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
No, it could not happen to anyone, for a whole host of reasons… A number that rounds to zero in the 21st century is the number of people who have been randomly cancelled. You can disagree that it is proportionate to their offense, but z e
467.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
No, even if it happened to me it would not be relevant for the vast majority.
468.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
Simply not an issue for nearly everyone.
469.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
Most parents don't take their children to playgrounds where the likelihood of putting toxic materials into their mouths is high. Also, having watched many a young child, this isn't normal behavior for children you leave alone to p
470.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
I have and when they try to put recycled tire in their mouths, I stop them. It is not a tenable position to suggest that children will unavoidably poison themselves, and that's just part of life...
471.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
I think there's a Bluey episode about not eating the recycled tires on the playground...
472.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
If your child is putting part of the playground into their mouth, you are doing it wrong, not the playground. And I think you misread; I said it was one of the primary responsibilities of a parent to keep toxic things out of your child&
473.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
Corporations are owned by people who do have civil rights.
474.
by WendyTheWillow 3y ago
While it may be a full time job, keeping toxic materials out of your child's mouth is one of the primary responsibilities of a parent. This is not a high bar.