krethh

3 ms·

1.
by krethh 6mo ago
You know how whenever you shuffle a deck of cards you almost certainly create an order that has never existed before in the universe? Most software does something similar. Individual components are pretty simple and well understood, but as
2.
by krethh 7mo ago
I stated plainly: "we have no data about this". Vibes is all we have. It's not just me though. Loads of people subjectively perceiving a decrease in quality of engineering when relying on agents. You'll find thousands of
3.
by krethh 7mo ago
Only if you accept the premise that the code generated by LLMs is identical to the developer's output in quality, just higher in volume. In my lived professional experience, that's not the case. It seems to me that prompting agent
4.
by krethh 7mo ago
This only works against crude attacks which will fail the schema/canary check, but does next to nothing for semantic hijacking, memory poisoning and other more sophisticated techniques.
5.
by krethh 7mo ago
> define communication protocols between them that fail when prompt injections are present There's the "draw the rest of the owl" of this problem. Until we figure out a robust theoretical framework for identifying prompt i
6.
by krethh 7mo ago
When I refer to AI, I mean the "AI" that has materialized thus far - LLMs and their derivatives. AGI in the sense that you mean is science fiction, no less than it was 50 years ago. It might happen, it might not, LLMs are in all l
7.
by krethh 8mo ago
The logical reason is that humans are exceptionally good at operating at the edge of what the technology of the time can do. We will find entire classes of tech problems which AI can't solve on its own. You have people today with job d
8.
by krethh 8mo ago
How ironic of you to call my argument an analogy while it isn't an analogy, yet all you have to offer is exactly that - analogies. Analogies to pilots, drivers, "a thousand examples of careers". My argument isn't an anal
9.
by krethh 8mo ago
A $3 calculator today is capable of doing arithmetic that would require superhuman intelligence to do 100 years ago. It's extremely hard to define "human-level intelligence" but I think we can all agree that the definition of
10.
by krethh 8mo ago
LLM's don't learn on their own mistakes in the same way that real developers and businesses do, at least not in a way that lends itself to RLVR. Meaningful consequences of mistakes in software don't manifest themselves throug
11.
by krethh 8mo ago
Respectfully, you seem to love the sound of your writing so much you forget what you are arguing about. The topic (at least for the rest of the people in this thread) seems to be whether AI assistance can truly eliminate programmers. There
12.
by krethh 2y ago
Let's make two generous assumptions: 1. ARC-AGI actually generalizes to human intelligence 2. It took 172x more compute to go from ~75% to ~87%, so it will take roughly 4x that to get to 99% (the level of a STEM graduate), assuming eve