throw234234234

8 ms·

61.
by throw234234234 1y ago
Generally you won't get stuck with F#, unless you would of got stuck with C# also. The escape hatch is there, with its pros/cons. The pro is mentioned - the con being that this is where F# gets im-pure and someone with experience
62.
by throw234234234 1y ago
YMMV but I find Java perf less even with the JIT than OcAml/F# .NET/etc for tuned code which generally is what matters when performance is a concern. The auto-boxing, lack of proper generics, etc really make it hard to do re-use i
63.
by throw234234234 1y ago
I did say "not all software is like this, but many domains are". So I agree with you. Also note unlike say for physical domains where it's expensive to "tear down" until you commit and deploy (i.e. while the code is
64.
by throw234234234 1y ago
Not sure about this. Coding has some unique characteristics that may it easier even if from a human perspective it requires some skill: - The cost of failure is low: Most domains (physical, compliance, etc) don't have this luxury where
65.
by throw234234234 1y ago
That is the ideal for the management types and the AI labs themselves yes. Copilots are just a way to test the market, and gain data and adoption early. I don't think it is much of a secret anymore. We even see benchmarks created (e.g.
66.
by throw234234234 1y ago
That there is the issue. Right now they may not be good enough and create issues - but they are still a lot more useful than they were. Any improvements will feed straight into the tooling without much effort. Don't get me wrong; I wou
67.
by throw234234234 1y ago
I will counter this with the fact that sometimes, and depending on the abstraction level that you are trying to solve/work at code or some other determinstic language is the right and easier way language to describe the context. This d
68.
by throw234234234 1y ago
Saw a recent talk where someone described AI as making errors, but not errors that a human would naturally make and are usually "plausible but wrong" answers. i.e. the errors that these AI's make are of a different nature tha
69.
by throw234234234 1y ago
I've found myself personally thinking English is OK when I'm happy with a "lossy expansion" and don't need every single detail defined (i.e. the tedious boilerplate, or templating kind of code). After all to me an L
70.
by throw234234234 1y ago
Both are true. What the parent poster is saying is that the models don't have to be perfect and can "hallucinate" because software is a unique domain in that: * Validation: You can validate against objective signals either yo
71.
by throw234234234 1y ago
I have to ask a probably naive question - after the initial boilerplate/scaffolding is this actually any faster than just typing in the code you want? Or using the standard AI flow before these long task agents? It feels like you are j
72.
by throw234234234 1y ago
My view is that it isn't really entirely about economics anymore at least on a traditional cost/benefit analysis basis. It is seen as a way to disrupt industries. Think of it more like war with arms race dynamics (winner takes all
73.
by throw234234234 1y ago
For me this is the "issue" I have with AI. Unlike say the internet, mobile and other tech revolutions where I could see new use cases or existing use case optimisation spring up all the time (new apps, new ways of interacting, mor
74.
by throw234234234 1y ago
Nah - those people have the bandwidth/time to justify their value in my experience. They are also usually the people managing the productive. Its the people that are constantly working, and too busy to be seen, producing output and kee
75.
by throw234234234 1y ago
Its hard to automate something that is hard to define, so I see the productive jobs/workers being punished by AI moreso than those jobs. Generally I see anecdotally: - Value creators (i.e. the ones historically carrying companies with
76.
by throw234234234 1y ago
Depends solely on the domain IMO. There are domains where stakeholders absolutely value quality (e.g. loss of revenue, fines and other consequences). This isn't universally true.
77.
by throw234234234 1y ago
Many people lost their livelihoods though in each transition. I find each life valuable but that's just me - yes we are better in aggregate long term but in some ways it is paved with their sacrifice. If we can find a way to support th
78.
by throw234234234 1y ago
It is a low likelihood and low severity risk for an individual manager/actor in any event with some potential mitigations (i.e. pay a little more if the time comes). Going by this and other forum's posts lately the mood seems to b
79.
by throw234234234 1y ago
5 years ago if you said coding tools would be worth in the billions in value it would of been surprising to most people. Dev Tools were the thing you could never get a company to buy for you or were just free for most people. Interesting ti
80.
by throw234234234 1y ago
You can for some features tag the type with a [<Struct>] attribute and it will compile down to a struct/value type representation. That includes records, DUs, active patterns, etc.
81.
by throw234234234 1y ago
Is AI like other technologies though? Most technologies require a learning curve that usually increases as the technology develops and adds features. They become "skills" in themselves. They are tools to be used; not the users of
82.
by throw234234234 2y ago
The most likely outcome of AI displacing skilled labour unfortunately.
83.
by throw234234234 2y ago
I find it personally better for CRUD applications than C# and I've written my share in both languages. Your syntax comparisons aren't exactly comparable in the sense that you haven't put in the wrapping/boilerplate aroun
84.
by throw234234234 2y ago
Evaluated F# vs Clojure. Speed of certain algorithms just lacked for me. Value types particularly in tail recursive stacks shines in F# compared to the JVM in general. As usual YMMV
85.
by throw234234234 2y ago
Not sure that C# is the more capable language - its still that F# is mostly a superset of C# although C# is catching up. I think they are on par w.r.t capability (i.e. CLR compatible). In terms of conciseness, and expression F# still wins I
86.
by throw234234234 2y ago
My view is that it will be some time before they can as well because of the success in the software domain - not because LLM's aren't capable as a tech but because data owners and practitioners in other domains will resist the cha
87.
by throw234234234 2y ago
That's easy. The CEO has authority and social connections, has done mutual beneficial deals, has the soft skills/position to command authority over others, has leverage over others, etc which is an economic asset. In an AI world t
88.
by throw234234234 2y ago
While I agree with you this cost isn't really borne by the people employing the human. Maybe the community, the taxpayer, even parents, but not the employer. As such these costs you mention are "sunk" - in the end as an emplo
89.
by throw234234234 2y ago
I'm not sure about that. For them to actually be economically useful is a high bar. More so than you think - it isn't just our brains but our strength, metabolisms, and more in a single package. For example you need them to: - Hig
90.
by throw234234234 2y ago
For most people AI is stuck at GPT 4 and other on par performance wise models. Anecdotally as well, many people that I know that have tried it found it mildly useful, but experience what coders and other tech workers experienced two years o

More ›