Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. Welp, for the first semester ever, SOTA LLMs can do *every single assignment, from scratch (readmes, etc.), and get 100%*.

Welp, for the first semester ever, SOTA LLMs can do *every single assignment, from scratch (readmes, etc.), and get 100%*.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
52 Posts 17 Posters 86 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • steve@discuss.systemsS steve@discuss.systems

    @cross @krismicinski @shriramk @jfdm @csgordon @lindsey @jeremysiek It’s amazingly depressing to me, not because I worry about AI tools making the work obsolete, but because the remarkable effectiveness of AI tools in the face of their shoddiness drives home to me that the vast majority of programmers are redoing a thing that’s already been done most of the time. What a waste of human capital.

    gwozniak@discuss.systemsG This user is from outside of this forum
    gwozniak@discuss.systemsG This user is from outside of this forum
    gwozniak@discuss.systems
    wrote last edited by
    #42

    @steve @cross @krismicinski @shriramk @jfdm @csgordon @lindsey @jeremysiek As a professional programmer now almost 20 years out from defending a thesis that was about code generation, I can't upvote this enough.

    LLMs are an incredibly inefficient way to do code reuse.

    cross@discuss.systemsC 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • gwozniak@discuss.systemsG gwozniak@discuss.systems

      @steve @cross @krismicinski @shriramk @jfdm @csgordon @lindsey @jeremysiek As a professional programmer now almost 20 years out from defending a thesis that was about code generation, I can't upvote this enough.

      LLMs are an incredibly inefficient way to do code reuse.

      cross@discuss.systemsC This user is from outside of this forum
      cross@discuss.systemsC This user is from outside of this forum
      cross@discuss.systems
      wrote last edited by
      #43

      @gwozniak @steve @krismicinski @shriramk @jfdm @csgordon @lindsey @jeremysiek yeah, I was going to comment that you had said something similar a few days or a week ago.

      It's wild to me that we keep writing the same program over and over again and calling it "progress."

      shriramk@mastodon.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • shriramk@mastodon.socialS shriramk@mastodon.social

        @lindsey @cross @krismicinski @jfdm @csgordon @jeremysiek
        It is absolutely an open research question as to what will be the new "source" and "intermediate" languages. I think we'll have a much better shot at the latter (richly-typed, semantic specifications as part of code, etc.); for the former, I think we'll build good ones but the trick will be getting people to use them.

        jschuster@hachyderm.ioJ This user is from outside of this forum
        jschuster@hachyderm.ioJ This user is from outside of this forum
        jschuster@hachyderm.io
        wrote last edited by
        #44

        @shriramk @lindsey @cross @krismicinski @jfdm @csgordon @jeremysiek Do you think that the "no one will look at the generated code anymore" future is inevitable? Given how often the industry has tried to generate programs directly from English-like specs before and failed, I'm quite skeptical, even if we have notably different tech this time around.

        Internally at Google many folks (including high-level ones) are making this claim without evidence, as if it's obvious from its face, and I'm surprised how few people push back on it or at least ask for more proof.

        jschuster@hachyderm.ioJ 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • jschuster@hachyderm.ioJ jschuster@hachyderm.io

          @shriramk @lindsey @cross @krismicinski @jfdm @csgordon @jeremysiek Do you think that the "no one will look at the generated code anymore" future is inevitable? Given how often the industry has tried to generate programs directly from English-like specs before and failed, I'm quite skeptical, even if we have notably different tech this time around.

          Internally at Google many folks (including high-level ones) are making this claim without evidence, as if it's obvious from its face, and I'm surprised how few people push back on it or at least ask for more proof.

          jschuster@hachyderm.ioJ This user is from outside of this forum
          jschuster@hachyderm.ioJ This user is from outside of this forum
          jschuster@hachyderm.io
          wrote last edited by
          #45

          @shriramk @lindsey @cross @krismicinski @jfdm @csgordon @jeremysiek LLM-based code generation reminds me of some of Bret Victor's talks: there are some cool ideas and convincing demos, but also a lot more work to do before one can say "we've solved all of the problems; everyone should be doing this all the time now".

          jschuster@hachyderm.ioJ 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • jschuster@hachyderm.ioJ jschuster@hachyderm.io

            @shriramk @lindsey @cross @krismicinski @jfdm @csgordon @jeremysiek LLM-based code generation reminds me of some of Bret Victor's talks: there are some cool ideas and convincing demos, but also a lot more work to do before one can say "we've solved all of the problems; everyone should be doing this all the time now".

            jschuster@hachyderm.ioJ This user is from outside of this forum
            jschuster@hachyderm.ioJ This user is from outside of this forum
            jschuster@hachyderm.io
            wrote last edited by
            #46

            @shriramk @lindsey @cross @krismicinski @jfdm @csgordon @jeremysiek To be fair: The LLM tooling is certainly more capable overall than the Bret Victor stuff. But I'm not yet convinced coding is 100% solved.

            shriramk@mastodon.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • tonyg@pubsub.leastfixedpoint.comT tonyg@pubsub.leastfixedpoint.com

              @shriramk @GeorgWeissenbacher @krismicinski @jfdm @csgordon @lindsey @jeremysiek ... did programming get easy? Can one be said to be programming if one asks someone else (or an LLM) to write a program for you? Or is some other kind of (not- or not-quite-programming) interaction going on?

              shriramk@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
              shriramk@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
              shriramk@mastodon.social
              wrote last edited by
              #47

              @tonyg @GeorgWeissenbacher @krismicinski @jfdm @csgordon @lindsey @jeremysiek
              I very much think of what I'm doing with Claude Code as a kind of programming — indeed, the kind of programming I always wished I could do! But if it makes you happier to use a different term for it (not "vibecoding", that has too many specific connotations and is definitely not how *I'm* doing things), and it's *useful* to have that other term…that's fine by me. I guess my slogan is: "Philosophy…but not too much".

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • tonyg@pubsub.leastfixedpoint.comT tonyg@pubsub.leastfixedpoint.com

                @shriramk @GeorgWeissenbacher @krismicinski @jfdm @csgordon @lindsey @jeremysiek ... did programming get easy? Can one be said to be programming if one asks someone else (or an LLM) to write a program for you? Or is some other kind of (not- or not-quite-programming) interaction going on?

                shriramk@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                shriramk@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                shriramk@mastodon.social
                wrote last edited by
                #48

                @tonyg Unrelatedly, I was in the UK last month, and when I gave a talk in London (and later in Cambridge), was pleasantly surprised that Noel Walsh stopped in. I was reminiscing about how I'd attended a Racket meetup he organized in Islington back in 2003 or so, where I believe we met!

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • cross@discuss.systemsC cross@discuss.systems

                  @gwozniak @steve @krismicinski @shriramk @jfdm @csgordon @lindsey @jeremysiek yeah, I was going to comment that you had said something similar a few days or a week ago.

                  It's wild to me that we keep writing the same program over and over again and calling it "progress."

                  shriramk@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                  shriramk@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                  shriramk@mastodon.social
                  wrote last edited by
                  #49

                  @cross @gwozniak @steve @krismicinski @jfdm @csgordon @lindsey @jeremysiek
                  We were already doing this. The entire low-code/no-code movement was all about making sure we stopped doing that in some domains, though we built 20+ systems that each tried to do that. (-:

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • jschuster@hachyderm.ioJ jschuster@hachyderm.io

                    @shriramk @lindsey @cross @krismicinski @jfdm @csgordon @jeremysiek To be fair: The LLM tooling is certainly more capable overall than the Bret Victor stuff. But I'm not yet convinced coding is 100% solved.

                    shriramk@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                    shriramk@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                    shriramk@mastodon.social
                    wrote last edited by
                    #50

                    @jschuster @lindsey @cross @krismicinski @jfdm @csgordon @jeremysiek
                    Of course I don't think we'll never need to ever look at generated code again; that would be a foolish position. The interesting question is how much will people need to, and relative to what? If you have an amazing test suite or rich verified properties, for instance, how much do you need to review code? Most people aren't writing Dan Cross-level code. (The Bret Victor analogy is good.)

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • shriramk@mastodon.socialS shriramk@mastodon.social

                      @jfdm @csgordon @lindsey @jeremysiek @krismicinski
                      "we are doomed" is an incredibly disappointing take. You should have come to my "GenAI and CS Ed" talk (-:.

                      If our only value-add was "my course was gated behind a needlessly difficult thing", that doesn't say much for the value of our courses.

                      ltratt@mastodon.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
                      ltratt@mastodon.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
                      ltratt@mastodon.social
                      wrote last edited by
                      #51

                      @shriramk @jfdm @csgordon @lindsey @jeremysiek @krismicinski A challenge -- which I think we're seeing from many people in this thread! -- is that in recent years we (speaking broadly) have magnified Certification as an outcome relative Education _and_ conflated the two together in ours and, often, students' minds. New technology might have undermined how we do Certification right now; perhaps that will also encourage us to change how we do Education?

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • steve@discuss.systemsS steve@discuss.systems

                        @cross @krismicinski @shriramk @jfdm @csgordon @lindsey @jeremysiek It’s amazingly depressing to me, not because I worry about AI tools making the work obsolete, but because the remarkable effectiveness of AI tools in the face of their shoddiness drives home to me that the vast majority of programmers are redoing a thing that’s already been done most of the time. What a waste of human capital.

                        steve@discuss.systemsS This user is from outside of this forum
                        steve@discuss.systemsS This user is from outside of this forum
                        steve@discuss.systems
                        wrote last edited by
                        #52

                        @cross @krismicinski @shriramk @jfdm @csgordon @lindsey @jeremysiek (with AI tools, they are still redoing a thing that they shouldn’t need to, but faster and sloppier.)

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        Reply
                        • Reply as topic
                        Log in to reply
                        • Oldest to Newest
                        • Newest to Oldest
                        • Most Votes


                        • Login

                        • Login or register to search.
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        0
                        • Categories
                        • Recent
                        • Tags
                        • Popular
                        • World
                        • Users
                        • Groups