• barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Oh great you’re one of them. Look I can’t magically infuse tech literacy into you, you’ll have to learn to program and, crucially, understand how much programming is not about giving computers instructions.

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Especially because programming is quite fucking literally giving computers instructions, despite what you believe keyboard monkeys do. You wanker!

          What? You think “developers” are some kind on mythical beings that possess the mystical ability of speaking to the machines in cryptic tongues?

          First off, you’re contradicting yourself: Is programming about “giving instructions in cryptic languages”, or not?

          Then, no: Developers are mythical beings who possess the magical ability of turning vague gesturing full of internal contradictions, wishful thinking, up to right-out psychotic nonsense dreamt up by some random coke-head in a suit, into hard specifications suitable to then go into algorithm selection and finally into code. Typing shit in a cryptic language is the easy part, also, it’s not cryptic, it’s precise.

    • Strider@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      That’s not the way it works. And I’m not even against that.

      It sill won’t work this way a few years later.

        • Strider@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          In part we agree. However there are two things to consider.

          For one, the llms are plateauing pretty much now. So they are dependant on more quality input. Which, basically, they replace. So perspecively imo the learning will not work to keep this up. (in other fields like nature etc there’s comparatively endless input for training, so it will keep on working there).

          The other thing is, as we likely both agree, this is not intelligence. It has it’s uses. But you said to replace programming, which in my opinion will never work: were missing the critical intelligence element. It might be there at some point. Maybe llm will help there, maybe not, we might see. But for now we don’t have that piece of the puzzle and it will not be able to replace human work with (new) thought put into it.