Unpopular opinion and I expect there will be a lot of pushback on it, but what's a good (polite) debate if not enlightening?
-
@JustinMac84 You can go back to your coding agent and outline the problems and if done right, get fixes too. Not always, and not always well, but that's what testing's for isn't it?
@Onj exponentially grow that problem for every bug report received, whereas a programmer with innate skill, one with an intimate understanding of software architecture, hardware and browser influence etc, would be able to have a more direct conversation, offering competent solutions they could be more assured of success with.
What damage would all the wild goose chases and delays do your brand?
-
@JustinMac84 You can go back to your coding agent and outline the problems and if done right, get fixes too. Not always, and not always well, but that's what testing's for isn't it?
@Onj Also, integrating yourself into someone else's system, i.e. curating AI code for errors, bears a higher cognitive load and has a higher risk of things being missed than if you code yourself.
-
@JustinMac84 Yep, but if there were such a thing as fiver for coding instead of music, same thing would apply there. Humans could be just as devious, make something that looks good and works on the outside, steals your crypto on the inside. Not nice.
@Onj I don't understand the point. There is Fiver for coding. You can commission people to produce software for you. Thing is, human-coded software, the culpability can be traced back. Imagine my shock, my horror, my outrage, when you told me the software I had my model produce for you introduced vulnerabilities! However did that happen? there's no way for you to prove that I didn't do it on purpose or that the model didn't mess up.
-
@JustinMac84 Yep, but if there were such a thing as fiver for coding instead of music, same thing would apply there. Humans could be just as devious, make something that looks good and works on the outside, steals your crypto on the inside. Not nice.
@Onj Proliferating the ability to produce software to many many more people just exponentially increases the possibility for mallice, unintentional vulnerabilities and incompetence. At least the hacker in your example is human, therefore can be blamed and had to invest a lot of time to get skilled. Do they want to blow that investment on bad acting?
-
@Onj I don't understand the point. There is Fiver for coding. You can commission people to produce software for you. Thing is, human-coded software, the culpability can be traced back. Imagine my shock, my horror, my outrage, when you told me the software I had my model produce for you introduced vulnerabilities! However did that happen? there's no way for you to prove that I didn't do it on purpose or that the model didn't mess up.
@JustinMac84 Sure, but I think you're doing what most people do right now, absolute, absolute worse-case scenario. I don't know why people do this honestly, other than if it scores points, but OK, point made. It could be terrible. It could be catastrophic but... What if it just isn't? What if it simply does the job it's intended to do?
-
@JustinMac84 Yep, but if there were such a thing as fiver for coding instead of music, same thing would apply there. Humans could be just as devious, make something that looks good and works on the outside, steals your crypto on the inside. Not nice.
@Onj Whereas an abusive partner could quite happily blow a day's effort to produce a tracker, key logger or other piece of malicious software with which to infect a partner, ex or rival business.
-
@JustinMac84 Yep, but if there were such a thing as fiver for coding instead of music, same thing would apply there. Humans could be just as devious, make something that looks good and works on the outside, steals your crypto on the inside. Not nice.
@Onj But anyway, this doesn't address your original point, my answer to which is that it's fine for an end user to have no idea how their product works and not to be able to fix it unaided, much less so for a dev or business supplying something they have no ideaabout to people.
-
@Onj But anyway, this doesn't address your original point, my answer to which is that it's fine for an end user to have no idea how their product works and not to be able to fix it unaided, much less so for a dev or business supplying something they have no ideaabout to people.
@JustinMac84 Lol come on now, businesses supply whatever to people all the time and how hard is it to get help with whatever it is when all the people you talk to are just people working there for work experience or something? We've probably all seen it. No excuse but you know it's true.
-
@JustinMac84 Sure, but I think you're doing what most people do right now, absolute, absolute worse-case scenario. I don't know why people do this honestly, other than if it scores points, but OK, point made. It could be terrible. It could be catastrophic but... What if it just isn't? What if it simply does the job it's intended to do?
@Onj I don't think it is worst case scenario. Worst case would be bad acting; second worst case would be unintentionally introduced vulnerabilities that allowed other bad actors; third worst case would be software that messes up your machine; fourth worst case would be incompatibility with certain setups and bugs.
-
@JustinMac84 Sure, but I think you're doing what most people do right now, absolute, absolute worse-case scenario. I don't know why people do this honestly, other than if it scores points, but OK, point made. It could be terrible. It could be catastrophic but... What if it just isn't? What if it simply does the job it's intended to do?
@Onj The point is that the quotes developer, who has outsourced all the skill to a stochastic parrot, has no idea how to fix any of those issues without arduous, lengthy back and forth that may introduce even more problems. Would you do that to a customer? Andre, I'm having this problem. Knowing that consulting an LLM is like rolling a dice, albeit a weighted dice and you wouldn't know if the answer was right or wrong,
-
@JustinMac84 Sure, but I think you're doing what most people do right now, absolute, absolute worse-case scenario. I don't know why people do this honestly, other than if it scores points, but OK, point made. It could be terrible. It could be catastrophic but... What if it just isn't? What if it simply does the job it's intended to do?
@Onj would you still pass on the magic 8-ball solution?
I'm sorry you feel that these arguments are an attempt to point score. They are not. In fact, your post is very topical. there is an article, just today, doing the rounds about Amazon having a high level meeting about a spate of outages affecting its business due to AI coding. A trillion dollar company is suffering because of this.
-
@JustinMac84 Lol come on now, businesses supply whatever to people all the time and how hard is it to get help with whatever it is when all the people you talk to are just people working there for work experience or something? We've probably all seen it. No excuse but you know it's true.
@Onj Yes it's hard, because paying skilled people that are actually encouraged to want to talk to people eats into profit margins and tech companies don't want to talk to people. But that's a systemic, a logistical problem. A company with good customer service and/or enough complaints/risk to brand, will have skilled people to fix the problem efficiently. I don't think the answer or argument is the bar is low so let's make it lower.
-
@Onj would you still pass on the magic 8-ball solution?
I'm sorry you feel that these arguments are an attempt to point score. They are not. In fact, your post is very topical. there is an article, just today, doing the rounds about Amazon having a high level meeting about a spate of outages affecting its business due to AI coding. A trillion dollar company is suffering because of this.
@JustinMac84 And that's on them. If those higherups are too stupid to properly test, that is a they problem. I can only speak for myself but I spend hours, sometimes days after getting a thing made, testing to the very best of my ability and I always ask my, as you put it, 'stochastic parrot' to write out a document detailing all steps.
I'm even more than happy to share the chats I have with it, I hide nothing.
I'm not doing this seriously, more for fun and that's it.
I'm just so tired of the massive amount of negativity around a thing. If one lives life like that, I pity them. I can't do it.
There's more to life than hate, than sadness, than negative vibes. -
@JustinMac84 And that's on them. If those higherups are too stupid to properly test, that is a they problem. I can only speak for myself but I spend hours, sometimes days after getting a thing made, testing to the very best of my ability and I always ask my, as you put it, 'stochastic parrot' to write out a document detailing all steps.
I'm even more than happy to share the chats I have with it, I hide nothing.
I'm not doing this seriously, more for fun and that's it.
I'm just so tired of the massive amount of negativity around a thing. If one lives life like that, I pity them. I can't do it.
There's more to life than hate, than sadness, than negative vibes.@JustinMac84 You're not even wrong, because clearly you've done all the reading, read all the bad press, and it vindicates your own bias about it (which goes back to my post in itself) and that's absolutely your choice to make. I'm not going to change your mind. I just think it's sad that before we can enjoy a new technology, we have to crap all over it first. It happens in all sectors when a new thing comes on the scene.
-
@JustinMac84 You're not even wrong, because clearly you've done all the reading, read all the bad press, and it vindicates your own bias about it (which goes back to my post in itself) and that's absolutely your choice to make. I'm not going to change your mind. I just think it's sad that before we can enjoy a new technology, we have to crap all over it first. It happens in all sectors when a new thing comes on the scene.
@Onj It's all about acceptable risk. If you and your circle are happy within the software that AI can produce, that's great. A business footing is different and I myself, if producing a marketable product would be unhappy to feedback to a user saying, I don't know what's wrong, I can't repplicate your problem, my AI model has suggested this, it might work it might not. I would also be unhappy with that level of uncertainty and support as a user.
-
@Onj It's all about acceptable risk. If you and your circle are happy within the software that AI can produce, that's great. A business footing is different and I myself, if producing a marketable product would be unhappy to feedback to a user saying, I don't know what's wrong, I can't repplicate your problem, my AI model has suggested this, it might work it might not. I would also be unhappy with that level of uncertainty and support as a user.
@JustinMac84 I've had people report back to me 'xyz' didn't work, I got it fixed. I'm just making addons though, not software to control military aircraft.
-
@Onj It's all about acceptable risk. If you and your circle are happy within the software that AI can produce, that's great. A business footing is different and I myself, if producing a marketable product would be unhappy to feedback to a user saying, I don't know what's wrong, I can't repplicate your problem, my AI model has suggested this, it might work it might not. I would also be unhappy with that level of uncertainty and support as a user.
@JustinMac84 today I even heard that someone was using my addon to make money. Happy for them. Never thought that would be a thing but why not?
-
@JustinMac84 You're not even wrong, because clearly you've done all the reading, read all the bad press, and it vindicates your own bias about it (which goes back to my post in itself) and that's absolutely your choice to make. I'm not going to change your mind. I just think it's sad that before we can enjoy a new technology, we have to crap all over it first. It happens in all sectors when a new thing comes on the scene.
@Onj Opposing tech for the sake of opposing tech is stupid. I would hesitate before describing a breadth of profound and, most importantly, substantiated concerns as negativity and hate though. I would argue that charging wrecklessly into the adoption of a technology, without considering all the ramifications is equally foolish. For me it's not about black and white no-one should use this stuff, it's about how the stuff is used.
-
@JustinMac84 You're not even wrong, because clearly you've done all the reading, read all the bad press, and it vindicates your own bias about it (which goes back to my post in itself) and that's absolutely your choice to make. I'm not going to change your mind. I just think it's sad that before we can enjoy a new technology, we have to crap all over it first. It happens in all sectors when a new thing comes on the scene.
@Onj If Microsoft, a staunch proponent of AI itself is publishing studies demonstrating that AI causes cognitive atrophy, a reduction in critical thinking skills; if Amazon itself is falling over badly generated AI code; if the BBC is testing chat bots and noting sometimes a 50% failure rate; if proper programmers are noticing the cumulative and most importantly hidden errors AI coders are generating...
-
@Onj Opposing tech for the sake of opposing tech is stupid. I would hesitate before describing a breadth of profound and, most importantly, substantiated concerns as negativity and hate though. I would argue that charging wrecklessly into the adoption of a technology, without considering all the ramifications is equally foolish. For me it's not about black and white no-one should use this stuff, it's about how the stuff is used.
@JustinMac84 Of course it is. If I made a thing, didn't even give it a single test and threw it out there and it killed someone's machine, that is terribly irresponsible. You haven't come up with a single good usecase so far though, your entire response to the thread has been:
Amazon screwed up, you could screw up, people are screwing up. your brand would suck if...That's putting problems and limits right at the door before you even step out of the house.
Me, I can't live that way. I think trying a thing and seeing if all it does is suck, is better than not knowing at all.
Taking other people's word for it, and again *only* seeing the bad in a thing, well it speaks for itself.
