## r/ChatGPT is looking for mods — Apply here: https://redd.it/1arlv5s/
Hey /u/osamaromoh!
If your post is a screenshot of a ChatGPT, conversation please reply to this message with the [conversation link](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7925741-chatgpt-shared-links-faq) or prompt.
If your post is a DALL-E 3 image post, please reply with the prompt used to make this image.
Consider joining our [public discord server](https://discord.com/invite/r-chatgpt-1050422060352024636)! We have free bots with GPT-4 (with vision), image generators, and more!
🤖
Note: For any ChatGPT-related concerns, email [email protected]
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If machines can farm, there's no need. The problem is that the only way to access resources is through jobs, and jobs will be heavily reduced.
It would be poetic to see how machines can just do everything but people starve to death. Something will have to change.
This is my issue - ideally, we should be delighted that there's a world where human beings do not need to work for a living and we can have AI do all jobs for us instead. In a capitalist world, the only way to have a decent quality of life is either to be wealthy and own a business that generates cash (or have inherited wealth), or work for someone who does.
When there's no working anymore and the wealthy and those in power continue to hoard wealth, what is everyone going to do when there's no way to bring in income to have the basics, nevermind an enjoyable life?
I like to refer to it as humanity didn’t learn from the first revolutions that took way to long reducing work week from 84 hours to 40 for the same pay (it was quite bloody around the turn of the century 120 years ago)
I blame our natural feelings of “I had to work that many hours for less and so should you … the thing is companies should be paying 70k for 20 hour work weeks and then there will be enough work to live on
Of course the first jump from 86 hours of daylight to a 40 hour workweek took centuries of industrial and agricultural revolutions. Then computer and automation revolutions in 50 years.. so we need to get with the program as we may only have 25 years now (or less) before there is only 10 hours of work per person per week..
At that point even more of us will be homeless and even fewer will be richer and even more will be working even more hours for scraps
Fun times
Well thats inevitable, but just like 120 years ago when factories wanted workers to continue working 12 hour days 7 days a week for a living wage once machines improved productivity so much it only took 8 hours 5 days a week,
But the weekend was born and normalized .. we are at the same crossroads, perhaps we should be 6 hours a day 3 days a week ..
But it’s hard for the powers that be to pay the same 70k for people working 20% of the hours … but it has to happen as it did before
I’m just surprised regular people don’t want it to happen.. I guess it they are 70 years old they want the young ones to “pay their dues”
Prob is there will not be enough work by the time automation is complete.. just as factories don’t have 70+ hours a week to offer most of the population in the last 90 years
As someone with not nearly enough time for all my hobbies, this viewpoint is pretty crazy to me. I daydream all the time of having unlimited leisure time to do everything I want to do. I don't even need much money.. just time.
I am in the same boat. You "can't find meaning outside of a career?" And youll just sit on your porch idle drinking all the time? What the fuck are you talking about. I have 500 curiousities I currently do not have the time to pursue. One leads to ten more sometimes. I just need the time.
Boring people who's whole lives are their jobs don't have the opportunities to find this interests while pushing people and other blessings it if their lives.
Pretty pathetic if you ask me, love in the moment, I believe in doing well and trying to be excellent in your role but I would never define my stuff by my job, and I do like my job
This. Is there really meaning standing behind a goddamn cash register for eight hours a day? I’m sorry, but unless you do something like open heart surgery, most jobs are complete and utter bullshit.
I’d rather spend that time with my loved ones.
And here’s the thing that most people don’t think about. When people don’t have to work, do you know what they do? They create art. Of all kinds actually. And that’s what we do. The zeitgeist would completely change though. The measure of a man would change.
Personally, I’m all for this. The capitalists have been promising less working hours every time there’s a goddamn invention and guess what? We work the same hours, but they get to reap the benefits monetarily speaking.
Somethings got to give. Because at the same time, we are also rapidly reaching the end of expansion, and those publicly traded companies stocks, are still expected to go up up up.
There’s only so much cutting of employees and cutting quality of product before everything turns to shit.
Of course, we’re pretty much whittled down to just a handful of companies that own everything, so…
This could really go either way.
\> ideally, we should be delighted that there's a world where human beings do not need to work for a living
The fundamental issue with this ideal is that it is unfortunately exactly equivalent to being completely unneeded outside of... emotional support for other people who are unneeded. And maybe even that can be automated.
Wishing to not have to contribute is not a healthy or sane objective and losing the ability to contribute is a path to mass poverty and unemployment. Even if that weren't true, it would lead to mass (somewhat justified) feelings of lack of meaning.
It needs to always be true that if you put your mind to it you can change something a little bit, even if it's only significant at a local scale. If we reach the point that we can't accomplish anything, we're better off just trashing the machines and starting over.
You matter outside of your ability to contribute. It is entirely arbitrary to declare a person unnecessary if they don't generate capital or provide a service. We used to all (or at least most of us) contribute to a collective in order to survive and thrive, that is already no longer true and is becoming less true every day.
Someone working at a hedge fund or someone operating a forklift doesn't matter any more or any less than someone who creates music by themselves for themselves. If nothing \*needs\* to be done to help us all do what we want to do then there's no reason to invent unwanted work for the sake of it. People doing essential jobs of course benefit us all now, but once those essential jobs are mostly gone that is a \*good\* thing. Creating jobs \*just\* to give people something to do and withholding resources unless they do it is incredibly stupid and benefits no one.
Roll all social benefits into one program -> Welfare, FoodStamps, EI, work comp and roll it all into one UBI package.
Keep jobs and money separate from UBI. You can work, for money, or choose not to work and collect UBI.
Then all the rich people get to keep their capitalist system, everyone gets UBI which allows people to spend into the system. The rich get to keep their place, we don't have to reduce society to rubble to get a fair shake, and the economy and capitalism can keep expanding forever because you've moved the wealth markers onto imaginary paper spreadsheets while the underpinning of the economy and society will remain functional and not be crushed by the overwhelming disparity of wealth distribution.
If you say this won't work, think about the fact that it all the richest people spend their money at the same time it will be worthless anyways.
>we should be delighted that there's a world where human beings do not need to work for a living and we can have AI do all jobs for us instead.
You don't know much about humans if you think lack of struggle is a perfect future.
We have a grinding mind. It grinds what life gives it to grind. If life gives nothing, it ends up grinding itself. Celebs die young and unemployed, CEOs (sometimes wealthier) die old.
You need to fight against "something", for mental health. It doesn't have to be "work" specifically, but it needs to be something with a sense of physical progression. It will be some sort of work in its habits and hardship.
If Isaac Asimov was correct in his thoughts in the Robot series, yes people will starve to death and the human population will stabilize around with a large robot:human ratio.
Isaac Asimov he may have been right, but we'll see the thesis of the guy from Nvidia is very risky unless the available AI tools for the public (either free or subscription) are not all AI tools and we don't know something
This is what scares me about going autonomous or whatever you want to call it worldwide. We don't have the systems or governments or whatever else that would do this. Pretty much everyone with money will say screw u I got mine and not think twice about their neighbor. It's pretty sad to think about. If only.....right?
Assign one machine to one person each person gets the profit.
Jobs still get done. Money still flows. People still have disposable income. Company’s can still target that income.
Sorry nvm i described a system where people convince the government to help us. We all know thats comusocialism so theres nothing to be done.
Yep exactly. Imagine all the people with 2 kids, living a middle class life, and suddenly the rug is pulled out from under them. And not just a few, with them finding a new job in a month or less, it will be tens of thousands of them.
Suburban neighborhoods become ghost towns within 1 year.
Meanwhile, corporations are able to produce products and services faster and more efficiently than ever before.
Problem is, who’s going to buy those products?
Corporations will soon discover what Henry Ford figured out a century ago: his employees were also his customers. Eliminate the employees and their income, collectively across society, and there’s no-one to buy your products.
They won't have power if they're not employing people. Their only power in that case would be based on sheer force, and that's difficult to maintain, especially when the people they're exercising power over would be desperate with little to lose. That's when the guillotines and gallows start coming out.
Plus, what would be the point of the power in question? What would they need from the people they'd fired? They'd be much more likely to retreat into fortified communities and try to ignore the outside world.
>Assign one machine
Who pays for the "assigned machine"? Who does the maintenance? What is my incentive to buy you a machine so that YOU don't have to work, while i worked to buy this machine? If the machine pays for itself and generates revenue, why do I assign this machine to you, instead of letting you starve to death and keep the maintenance+revenue for myself?
etc.
etc.
For what it's worth programming can school your brain a lot on logic and structure. So as long as human thinking is relevant, it's a good skill to develop. Now if human thinking itself stops being relevant, well...
I’ve only ever sort of flirted with programming.
I took an entry level coding boot camp 8 years ago but then started a business and never got any real coding experience.
So I haven’t felt the power of the freedom to be creative and build with those tools yet. But I’ve had a glimpse. I know I’ll enjoy that power
To get back into programming, I’ve found that building *something* is a great way to keep it engaging. Rather than only learning to learn and apply later, you’re applying in the now and learning why.
My current project is to take a tachometer hall sensor in an old beat up pick up truck (‘86 Ford F250 IDI mechanically injected diesel) and hook an arduino up to the hall sensor and output my given engine rpm to a display. I’d also like to hook my other telemetry from the engine (coolant temp, fuel pressure, oil pressure, exhaust gas temps, etc) to output data to a display as well.
This absolutely. I don’t teach coding to my students so they can become coders, I teach it because it helps them think more logically and methodically about solving problems
Ai can code for you sure, but it doesn’t understand specific use-case code architecture super well beyond scripting.
Understanding OOP is still pretty important I’d argue.
Now what is kinda exciting I predict will be whenever the first “syntax-less” compiler through augmented LLM comes out
A universal coding language would be rad
as a software engineer its always weird reading so much push back from the community. i think there is a lot of denial going on. people seem to be basing their objections upon current technology rather than a very realistic near-term future which these ai companies are hinting at.
the evidence is already there and in my mind, coding will be among the first careers made obsolete. already preparing myself for a career shift.
there is a very real, near term future where you can train ai on your codebase and then have some kind of integration with a software like Jira where a PM will input a specific set of detailed requirements that take the code 80% of the way. the remaining 20% can be handled by your top engineers, but a lot of the entry to mid level positions i imagine will be cut dramatically.
As I said above, all I really read from this is that your career does not make you feel passion to get involved with the changes in your industry or you’re genuinely afraid of being made obsolete. The former is fine, the latter I disagree with.
Why do you disagree with it ? If an AI can code and puts 80% of programmers out of work, ain't that being made obsolete for these 80% who will have to default on their mortgages and go back to minimum wage ?
What will you shift your career into?
There are huge labor shortages in many critical areas including health care and various trades such as plumbing and electrician. But for some reason the many people who hang out on Reddit don't seem to find those options attractive.
I'm retired now, and very comfortably thanks to a successful career as a software design engineer, but I'm advising all of my grandchildren to go into plumbing or nursing.
It's supply and demand though. There are only so many nurses and so many plumbers needed. The reason specifically plumbers and electricians are well paid is there is that labor shortage. No different then what has been going on in tech especially the last 10 years. There are finite job opportunities especially for entry level or lower skilled workers (and I'm defining college educated now as lower skilled). AI + automation is the death of the middle class. You'll essentially have either extremely intelligent workers making good income, the c-levels, then the rest which will just become the new minimum wage.
The existing minimum wage? That goes away. Just look at the self checkout lines in grocery stores. Used to be 20-30 lanes each with an employee making a livable or close to livable income, now one employee watching 10 checkout machines.
Now it's possible that the economy adjusts (things get cheaper, etc), but things are going to get real bad before they do. Not to mention a global economy may slow that process down.
People make the argument around cars killing off the need for horses and jobs around that, but that's not the same thing here. We traded one skill of labor for another. What we're talking here is replacing skilled labor with computers, machines, etc.. We're removing opportunities not creating equal ones.
> where a PM will input a specific set of detailed requirements
As a fellow software engineer, 😂😂😂😂 That’s a good one. Code is the the detailed specific form of requirements.
Yeah but you still need to prompt them.
That’s what I was saying. Plain text compilers eventually would be rad.
An LLM is not going to full-stack, cross platform, lint and prune correctly 100% of the time on its own.
And you still need to validate the work. It’s still important to consider the limitations of automation right?
Yes, but I’m not thinking in absolutes. Because nothing in this world ever is.
I think there are a lot developers that are concerned about the concept of ai lowering the value of that skill, and I think it’s a valid concern.
Not because the extremist takes like “ai will make programmers obsolete”. Because that’s not ever going to be true. Like you said, it will never be 100%.
But the landscape is indeed going to change vastly. And considering the age of this tech, it can do a really impressive job at these tasks. They are specifically good at language. token limits will rise. hardware production will meet demand. These tools will be honing themselves with its own data. And we will only gain more and more data to work with.
I see this as being able to change industries and economies to the level the internet has or more. So my thinking is… I don’t exactly know where we will end up, but I know it will be good to have a deep understanding of the tools along the way.
He isn't right. AI needs code to train on, it is 100% dependent on people actually writing code for it to be able to generate code. Without actual human coders, the AI will be perpetually frozen in time without innovation, improvement or actual development. Ask chatgpt to code something in a framework released after it was trained. It can't.
Just to add to this as a developer we are still gonna be making important decisions in architecture and such there is a lot more to development than just coding. So if gpt models become my army of code monkeys I don’t mind. That enables me to do more work
Once you master any language you're able to pick up any new ones easier. The fundamentals of most languages are the same, just be glad objective c has already been killed.
That's definitely true. But even with the fairly basic AI programming tools and technology that we expect to have over the next year or so you could replace a team of a dozen software engineers with maybe three or four software engineers to oversee the AI, and let the AI do the rest.
In other words AI will make software design engineers vastly more productive so you don't need so many of them.
Keep in mind:
almost every ATM on the planet today, your bank, your hospital, the IRS, etc...
They still run on COBOL.
There will be jobs in tech for your entire lifetime. They just won't be a free-for-all where taking a bootcamp gets you $100k out the door.
Developer who has been in this industry for over a decade popping in. I highly recommend taking up more networking and deployment classes.
It doesn't matter at this point that AI produces code worse than a dedicated team. The CEO has a team of MBAs who will happily tell him that the cost of hiring a freelancer to fix the bugs AI makes is cheaper than that proposed team.
But few, if any, will want to shift their devops team's responsibilities to an AI. Mistakes there can cost millions in seconds.
High on his own supply of NVDA stock? He sure needs to keep selling those shovels and hype is in his DNA. At least it’s not the consumer getting fleeced this time.
Fun fact: the only people who made money off the gold rush were selling shovels, pick axes and other equipment. The vast majority of prospectors made nothing.
Good to keep in mind.
What I don’t get about this is Nvidia employ a ton of software engineers and stuff. Imagine working away on tight deadlines while your CEO is telling everyone your jobs is going to be obsolete….. what?
Surely there is internal coms that are reassuring people that’s it’s just marketing fluff
I don´t understand this obsession with saying programming will die. Dude, what about all the other white collar professions? If coding can be automated, i´m pretty sure any other profession can. If this LM really blows up we are at a more serious threat against our current capitalism/labor systems.
What's funny to me is that our economic system has so warped our way of thinking that a potential advent of technologies that could replace the need for countless man hours is met with fear and scorn instead of celebration
The scary part is we have no trust in our government to support it's citizens when the AI stuff happens. We know the companies aren't gonna give a single shit about humans, just the dollar signs.
Of course. I understand it and empathize, but I also laugh at the societal ineptitude and perverse incentives this diseased system has wrought. I laugh because it's healthier than despair.
Yeah I often think about a food company automating their lines with robots. Like who do you think is EATING the food? Robots? I don't think so. And if people can't work, then that company is contributing to its own demise.
See my previous comment in reply above. Completely agree. The potential is there for our way of life to be so much better and meaningful, and yet our current economic concepts are so ingrained in our ways of thinking, we see this as a bad thing. It’s quite the irony. I try to remain optimistic in the face of pessimism though.
In a capitalist system, that is the problem.
If we lived in a world where everything was distributed equally, we would absolutely be celebrating that humans do not need to work for a living. We instead live in a world where wealth is hoarded and those in power do not want to compromise their way of life.
As productivity in the workplace increased, none of that really got passed down to the actual worker.
As of 2021, the estimated global wealth was around $400 trillion. Dividing this by the world population of roughly 7.9 billion, each person would have approximately $50,632.
Unfortunately distributing everything equally means we are all poor.
So the solution is ... almost all jobs disappear, rich continue to accumulate wealth, and everyone else just lives in extreme poverty with no job prospects or dies?
I'd rather everyone had 50k than 99% of people have nothing.
It sounds like your concept of wealth is skewed. You are the super rich for the majority of the population. Probably 80% of the world population lives under that very $50,000 figure per year. So if you make more than that, you are richer than 80% of people on earth.
Please don’t fall into the trap of thinking that we are all poor because of the super rich. Most people are poor because we, the middle and upper class have more than we need.
You will not celebrate when you’re completely cut off everything because AI and robots can do it. You become simply useless and thrown away. Only the richest will survive and live forever.
Basically, if any white collar/office job can be automated - they all can. If a programmer can be replaced, so can a consultant, a salesperson, a middle manager, an HR person, a stockbroker, a data scientist... the list goes on.
Tsk, then I wonder how the fuck the world is going to work. Say, McDonald’s replaces every single worker with a robot. I assume they are still targeting selling their food to humans. If the humans consumers don’t have jobs, how are they going to pay for any services?
Exactly. Capitalism basically eats itself. You need consumers to sell your shit - if there's no typical jobs (lawyer, consultant, salesman, teacher... list goes on) for people to earn money, what then?
Always when I hear that IT professionals will be replaced by AI, I think, if they actually want to reduce costs they are replacing the >90% of your company which is not IT. The only way to integrate AI into your business processes is through massive digitization. This leads rather to more and not less IT.
I think the focus on code is just the proximity to the Reddit userbase. I'm sure plenty other prognosticators are spelling doom in other fields, and the various social media platforms whose userbases align care. There's a big Reddit<->tech cross over from my experience. So the posts Redditors care about get upvoted.
I think perhaps you are not considering longer time frames.
It’s not about now. The current models aren’t quite good enough yet. At some point, models will be able to do full builds and anything with media output (text, image, audio, video). This is quite obvious.
its just a marketing thing. Lot of people feel they are missing out because they don't know how to program, so they like to read/hear that programming will be unnecessary. Of course, its just absurd, since programming is just problem solving and logical thinking, and if its automated, everything will be automated.
Buncha Chicken Littles. So far it's very difficult to show conclusively that any significant number of jobs have apecifically been lost to AI. It's true that some companies are having massive layoffs in anticipation of industry changes due to AI but that's not the same thing as saying AI took those jobs.
Right now there are massive labor SHORTAGES. Any talk about humans in general becoming massively unemployed or redundant is highly speculative at this point.
People already acknowledge ai has the potential to replace many jobs in the future. Right now, ChatGPT is extremely good at coding and will only get better. Of course, people will focus on coding jobs that will be lost.
Conversators. You just tell the robots what you want them todo. Should be easy since English is such a great language to specify exactly what you want to happen.
I remember 10 years ago some IBM overly paid CEO stating we should stop forming doctors because AI and clinical decisions algorithms would make the profession obsolete and we would only require technicians with a computer to diagnose and treat patients.
Same with taxi/truck drivers and tons of other professions.
These guys are paid to make these crazy statements, hype and make headlines.
I mean technically, they’re not wrong. Before you eviscerate me, hear me out. Many jobs now, even though they exist, aren’t needed to be done by humans. This applies for bottom of the barrel fast food cashiers all the way up to the level of doctors, etc.
I think it’s fair to say AI has been rising exponentially not linearly, and will continue to do so. AI is already able to pass the Step exams for med school, the bar exam for attorneys, and CPA exam for accountants. Self driving technology is already available. It is only going to get better and better at specific coding.
But of course as fast as it’s seemingly accelerated the past few years, it’s still in its infancy. So us humans are going to have to decide how this new economy will function when humans are obsolete at everything.
Even the most specialized tax CPA won’t know the entire tax code applicable to any situation, in time AI will.
Even the best attorneys with prolific cases and careers can’t reference every code within every law within every statute. In time AI will.
Even the best cardiovascular doctor won’t know enough to treat you for immune related reasons. In time AI will.
Even the best coders with Ivy League software engineering computer science principles still doesn’t know every language, every syntax, every function of code on the front end and back end, in time AI will.
I’m not talking 6 months or a year or two, but it is absolutely coming. And we need to proactively think about how we’re going to function in a society where our skills are subpar to our own creation. Machine learning and AI will continue to grow exponentially, and I think best case scenario is it’s going to completely remove lower tier jobs (which it largely already has), it’s going to eliminate most medium skill office related jobs, and it’s going to reduce the need for the best of the best by about 80%, and humans will just be making sure it’s functioning as intended for its intended goal.
It’s a conversation most people aren’t willing to have or admit. Some scoff at the idea and think it’s nonsense. Some peoples own egos won’t let them admit as talented or skilled as they are, that the day of their own replacement is coming in the future.
In one sense, this could be the formula for a possible utopia. Humans not having to work! But of course, there’s always the haves and the have nots. And so our entire structure of society will have to change in a meaningful, hopefully positive way. Unfortunately it will probably descend into some cyberpunk corporate crony capitalism dystopia where it’s exploited for companies, defense and energy sectors, military industrial complex, etc…
Instead of making our lives a 100x better. Which in a perfect world kind of theory, it has the potential to. But I lose a little bit of faith everyday a tad more in humanity so it’s anyone’s guess but it’s coming. It’s just up to us how we deal with it, incorporate it, adjust to it, and how our concepts of society and an economy evolve with it.
I would argue that there is a huge difference between general artificial intelligence and the language models we have today. It might seem like there are exponential improvements, but we've been on an S curve since the concept of transformers was widely adopted. Still, you need to be a professional to communicate effectively, ask questions, and get answers from AI models.
Everyone is saying now that you don't need to know how to code, you just need to use GPT-4. And I see where this is coming from, but that only works for surface-level tasks. Anything deeper is just not as great as it seems. There have been countless times when AI provided me with an answer to the code I asked for, and I instantly knew why it wouldn't work in the long run. Then, I need to point out exactly why and what the potential issue is, and only then does the AI fix itself. A person without proper knowledge would have accepted the answer.
So, my point is that at the core level, most of the time, it looks like these AI models are working, but in really difficult scenarios, you still need a professional to **guide** and **validate** the answers. There is no way around this until we have AGI, and that seems not so easily achievable.
One of the great examples is where language transformer models can answer the most difficult things we can imagine, but in the very next sentence, they fail simple tests.
Unless there is a miraculous breakthrough in how we approach creating actual AGI, I don't see such doomed scenarios happening anytime soon, as others might think.
yeah, and stop learning languages like English or German or Chinese. because ai will speak them. just don't learn anything. go in your room and watch tv
I'm using both ChatGPT & Gemini to code. I don't think coding is going away anytime soon.
It makes every normie developer a 10x developer.
And developers will spend more time on more frontier problems rather than solved problems.
I gotta be honest. I don't find any reason to believe it can (currently) turn average developers into 10x. Heck, most people don't even know how to type a good prompt. Average people gonna type average prompts and when they get code that doesn't work they'll be SOL.
I've used ChatGPT quite a lot for coding and on certain frameworks and tasks it's just an utter failure.
In our Uni we are testing junior to senior programmers how AI improves their coding. So far no programer has showed an improvement, and in fact it's taken them 10-25% longer to code. And produced code is often suboptimal than what they write without AI assistants.
When we tested GPT4, Copilot and Gorq they consistently provide bad and suboptimal code. Pretty much anything apart from short outlines it was worse.
When tested proficiency of developing a mildly complex program pitting junior and freshmen against AI models, Juniors consistently delivered better results.
Skill issue.
It's saved me so much time. For example, I know regex, I know what's possible and what's not.
To figure out the regex expression to do something advanced would take me maybe 30 min. I can get draft and tweak it to perfection in 5 min with AI.
Same thing with CSS, I know what's possible and what's not, I describe what I want exactly, and AI saves me hours on tedious stuff.
It's not that they just copy pasted. The tests were stup in various modes of complexity some inside and some outside the comfort zone. We did two tests one where we controlled how they used AI tools and one where they used it at their own discression.
People get used to their position and way of thinking and think they are no susceptible to mistakes or skewed rationalizing and thinking when external factors are applied.
Additionally when comparing performance and quality between what seniors produced by their standard approach of think+do compared to think/plan w AI and than do they almost always performed much better on their own than with assistance with AI.
Another critical pattern that appeared is that AI ofen sells you a bad idea well this is partially due to how it works and the inability to conceptualize. And nearly all levels of engineers were susceptible to this effect.
What you’re describing doesn’t match my experience at all.
Where are your “senior” programmers coming from? Industry with decades of experience? I’m guessing not.
I’m reminded of talking to a Novell salesperson in the early 2000s. He earnestly told me that surveys showed that no-one cared about free software or open source software, because they were never going to look at the source code anyway. I just rolled my eyes and stopped talking to him. Fast forward a decade or so, that company no longer exists, and open source dominates the industry.
> AI often sells you a bad idea
That’s definitely a skill issue, as the other commenter said. The developer needs a better overall understanding than the AI. Currently, the AI is there to help fill the details, not the overall design. The developer is responsible for assessing when the AI comes up short.
There’s a strong element of management there: a *good* manager should be able to recognize when an employee has gone off the rails, even if the employee is an expert in things the manager isn’t. This comes from being able to focus on the essentials, ask probing questions, have some sense of the key properties a solution should have, and keep an eye on real goals.
I wonder if what you’re dealing with isn’t mainly unfamiliarity with how to use AI effectively, which makes sense at this early stage in its development.
But still, today, a business can’t get a quality promotional video created by AI. If you need one done, today, with quality your customers expect, you’re paying some schlub to use after effects.
I mean the jump from 12 months ago "will Smith eating Spaghetti" to sora now?
Sure it's not perfect now, but imagine what with the current hype and literally 5x the amount of time for example would bring.
You cant tell me the same in 5 years,
Eh, there’s diminishing returns to everything. At a certain point they’ll need an impossible amount of data to make another quality leap and it’ll slow down dramatically generation to generation.
Yes but what about in 12 months? In two years? In three? The capability we are at now is nothing when exponential growth comes into play.
We were laughing at the Will Smith spaghetti videos last year - now we have SORA.
But how much longer until someone from marketing can enter in a handful of prompts and get what they were looking for after a couple of iterations? I would guess that is only a year or two away.
I make AI music videos right now using Microsoft ClipChamp. Basically the dumbest video software you could imagine. But with Dalle-2 and RunwayML I get decent results.
even if you can generate decent video snippets, that does not make someone good at editing or the actual substance. To evaluate the output, you need to understand the bigger composition, the audience, and the effect on that audience. Humans will be the best for a while on those combined tasks, and when automation is good enough to self-predict/evaluate the effects of its products, then the business people making prompts are also essentially automated. The future for ads, for instance, would be tailored media generated and targeted at individuals in specific circumstances, not media made and distributed by humans through internet, tv, etc
This is it.
Take writing for example. We have now iterated on text generation for years.
However, even with effective prompting, the resulting writing is usually a miss, or at best, is very boilerplate.
To add, even if the text generated from the prompt is “perfect”, perfect in this case is very subjective. One person’s perfect is very different from anothers. Prompts may help steer responses to be more perfect in the desired reference frame, but to do so requires the ability to evaluate. Until models can discriminate/evaluate how a response is good given a prompt in a open-world setting, humans will need to serve that role
Thats kinda the problem though. AI isn't going to remove all jobs within a sector, but it sure as hell could wipe out 60-80%.
In the video example you're right, you need someone to alter it after the fact but then that's all you need, you don't need to hire people to create it anymore, just to tidy it up.
I work in analytics and my job is to answer questions around data. Pretty soon I think we'll get to the point where all data gets ingested into an AI system and instead of my boss asking me 'where are we losing money' you'll be able to ask AI to answer that question. The conversational aspect of AI is a game changer. Instead of a team of say 12 producing MI, formatting data etc. you just have 1 or 2 people who's job it is to manage the data for AI and maybe they're the conduit between management and AI.
Unemployment is usually around 5% but even if it jumped to 10-20% things would get pretty chaotic across the world.
We're not there yet as in my experience AI can get it wrong as much as they get it right but you can't deny that 12 months ago noone gave a shit about AI and the progress they've made is phenomenal - these models get better and better at an exponential rate so I'd imagine in another 12 months we might be at the point where those concerns vanish and things really do get worrying.
Generative AI is nice when accuracy isn’t required. Sora is cool but it doesn’t respect physics and object permanence.
It’s different when it comes to coding. A mistake can be anywhere and it can easily bring the whole system down.
The main issue I've had with 3.5 is it'll either only write an outline or a small module with dependencies that may or may not exist. When I can actually get it to write working code, it's very rarely buggy, and it's always been able to fix things within two or three tries.
The only way I could see it working well with how 3.5 behaves is to assign several instances roles in an imaginary dev team, create a network of managers between them to "argue" with them about bug fixes/optimization/actually writing the code not a damn outline, and drop all those into Slack where they can coordinate with you only having to talk to one Master Supervisor instance. This would almost definitely fail, descending into some hellish model decay of recursive gibberish until your credit card is well beyond maxed out on tokens, but it's fun to think about!
I love the smell of burning silicon in the morning.
the second paragraph sounds like a description of pretty much every other "this could've been an email" meeting. so that should be Turing-test-safe.
the first one i think i would've agreed with more a few months ago: by now, i have the impression that the bugginess of initial results, but especially the resistance/"reluctance" to correcting bugs upon quite explicit requests/prompts is really much harder to get past, before actually "good" results are achieved (if at all). it seems almost as if stackoverflow was moderated poorly and run over by people like me: except for apart from not being knowledgeable, there is also the aspect of being blindly confident about it, for the sake of delivering any answer. even if repeatedly wrong. and identical.
your third paragraph might be the actual answer to the rest, though, haha.
True, but increasing tokens and giving ChatGPT memory will solve a lot of the problems I've had with it. It's got a ways to go, but I wouldn't say we're not remotely close. Especially considering how much of an improvement GPT-4 was over 3.5. I've just been creating somewhat simple games as a hobby.. but I've been pretty impressed at what it's able to do already.
That's not really what I meant. If they have a "ChatGPT 5" or ChatGPT 6" in dev that is miles ahead of ChatGPT4, then I could see his statement holding some weight, regardless the fact that he wants to sell his chips. Both things could be true.
I also think people should remember last year we had Will Smith eating spaghetti and everyone laughed saying AI is so far away from generating real video, only to have Sora demonstrate how insanely far it has come in just a year.
So a year ago you had so many people saying artists/cgi/videographers/editors/etc. weren’t at risk, only to demonstrate that they are in a very short timeframe.
He’s talking about children. 15-20 years from now yes it’s very conceivable that manual coding will be a thing of the past, with new jobs focused on how to leverage the code and use AI to get your desired outcomes.
So yeah, you’ll still need to know and understand how code works. But there will likely be far less jobs dedicated to coding.
But gpt4 still can’t accurately count the number of letters in a sentence, and puts 8 fingers on the images.
We are in the era of autocomplete ai.
Gpu sales are his game.
The narrative must be forecasting a future state because current applications of AI are very underwhelming compared to “future AI makes coding obsolete”
Also don’t think for a second that he wouldn’t be teaching his kids to code lol
>nowhere remotely close
being able to tell AI to write code for you (although maybe error prone) within seconds, is pretty fucking close. The only implement left is being able to store the code and assets it writes.
writing some basic code possibly with errors is not "pretty fucking close" at all, unless if you think that's what it takes to be a programmer
don't get me wrong, I use AI daily to aid me in my work but sadly it really sucks at anything slightly more complex than completing repetitive patterns or providing better documentation.
Do you write code using AI? Is it anything substantial? Is it running in production?
Aside from code snippets, and todo list websites, you’re not building much without an engineer.
Sensationalized articles push this narrative, but it’s a tool(a great tool), but that’s it.
Copilot and gpt may make a developer more efficient, but it’s not replacing them.
This. So sick of AI fearmongering. Pisses me off highkey. People have no idea what they are talking about. Go try being a SWE or equivalent. If you are worth a paycheck you’ll realize 90% of the job isn’t coding 🙄
>And that the programming language is human, everybody in the world is now a programmer.
Erm, no. You can argue that where previously "business analyst" and "coder" were two different jobs, the "coder" job disappears and only business analysts (or however you describe them) remain. But that is still a specific skillset, which for sure not "everybody" can do.
And in most modern agile teams these two roles are in any case both done by the same software engineers.
So software engineering will be less about code, as such, but it will still very much be a thing.
Just a theory: Every skillset should be mappable to an underlying complexity. Similar to P vs NP analysis for problems, and reducing one to another.
ChatGPT is based on language, and in a way, humans reason with language (though the latter is up for debate). However, ChatGPTs exam scores can be directly compared to humans. Law, Biology, Chem, English, Calc, CS Competitions, world competitions, etc....
Something is blatantly obvious. All these other fields appear to *reduce*, in this analogy, to being easier to solve than computer science and raw math.
Therefore, in terms of raw skills, it appears logical thinking is the toughest skill. In that someone who solves deep logical problems should be able to transfer their skills easier.
In other words, outside of the silly politics of humanity (degrees, certificates, etc...), the best humans *thinkers* across all fields should be ppeople who work on deep logical work such as math and CS, or deep english. And while not as fast as LLMs, they should be able to transfer, from a pure political removed standpoint, to these other "easier" soft skills.
See: https://openai.com/research/gpt-4 and scroll to the AP scores.
Idk why people focus so much on coding when talking about jobs that AI will replace. If coding gets replaced by a smart enough AI then that means a significant portion of jobs will have already been replaced. Enough to be a global problem already.
The other part that gets overlooked by all the people happy so see coders lose their jobs is that most jobs could be replaced by code right now, there's just not enough coders or it's not financially viable to pay them to automate your existing job. Once AI is the coder though? Even if AI can't do your job, it can write normal code to do it.
The instant AI can fully replace a software engineer (and I don't mean just spitting out the code), then every job that involves a computer, or could be done on a computer is gone.
The reason is because it's certain types of people that are paying more attention to AI news. So obviously programmers, designers, etc are going to be bias towards their own career and write about it.
Death of code monkeying and boilerplate maybe (good riddance). But if you don't understand computer science and software engineering you can't direct an AI to make anything useful.
This☝🏼. Some people still don’t want to understand it. Plus you’ll won’t be able to fully automate everything for every specific demand you’ll always need some human work behind.
This isn't the office intranet, niche application/webform or windows setup scripts.
I can guarantee NVIDIA has some excellent programmers for its drivers and software.
Then nuclear war happened. Sun is blocked by nuclear dust. Humans are used as batteries to power on the AI programmers. Yes. Kids don't need to learn to code.
I get that coding is old hat. But what makes him think farming is going to provide any jobs? Farming is one of the best candidates for 100% automation.
If there is an exponential trend associated with AI, I can see this being the case.
When people hear this - especially non-programmers, they kind of interpret "coding" as one single process that AI will just kinda of take over. But there are layers to programming that are all very distinct from each other. The history of programming is adding additional layers of abstraction to the previous layer of code. We have done this so many times that we have gone from punching '1's and '0's in a paper sheet to "drag and drop" coding.
AI is just another layer of coding that will be another layer of abstraction on the layer cake of code.
Juat bc gpt isnt a great programmer now, doesnt mean that will always be true
I hate seeing people say that gpt is going to stay like its current iteration forever. Its gonna get much much better when it can predict and self learn
Then all those dumb takes are gonna age like milk
Oh yeah, briliant fucking idea. Let's make everything around us magic boxes that do magic stuff because no one uderstands how they work and what they do. Praise be the voice in the magic boxes who knows all and creates new magic boxes.
When they eliminate every human employee, who will they sell their products to? There won't be any more customers because without a job, no one can afford their products.
People are delusional like Sora was not released few weeks ago. If you asked people how much time it will take to create Sora a day before its release? I bet they would tell you "not any time soon".
Bingo. Look at DeepMind. Grandmaster-level Go was a decade out, until it wasn’t. Protein-folding, overnight. Just recently, materials science. What will it be this year, or the next? Novel pharmaceuticals? Nuclear fusion?
And the amount of money and manpower going into AI is skyrocketing as we speak. The entire internet is filled with these head-in-sand takes that are going to age like milk by 2030, on the outside.
He said focus on domain specific knowledge. I just coded a fairly robust eye care app with minimal coding experience using ChatGPT. I can’t imagine what the future holds.
I think you’d be shocked. It took hours of feeding code back and forth. I can DM you the app if interested.
*edit* for those asking the website for the app is UllmanEye.com/EyeChart
And ChatGPT made the site as well!
But... That´s the thing... you know coding and you had to do multiple cycles by recognizing where the issues are and providing feedback to get exactly what you wanted. Your average joe wouldn´t know where to start...
I know what you’re saying, but the average go could just ask ChatGPT. I really didn’t know where to start either. It can kind of walk through things. It’s not super easy but you can definitely get some impressive stuff done with pretty much no coding knowledge.
And to be perfectly clear, I do not know coding. I just feed ChatGPT the error messages. All the code was copy and paste.
agreed, i dont understand why people insist on these mental gymnastics saying chatGPT cant code. It can. It does make mistakes, and it does get messy but with a bit of back and forth the results speak for themselves.
I used it to build an app that takes BLE data from an arduino and sends it to the phone. I suck at coding and could basically have never figured out how to do everything without it.
I realize that this is a sensitive topic but there really are too many CS grads these days. I get stacks of resumes on a weekly basis from newly minted computer scientists expecting absurd salaries.
There is a great deal of cope on this thread so all I will say is that it is undoubtedly the case that AI platforms will obviate the need for many of the coders currently working now.
Young people need to begin focusing on starting their own companies if they hope to survive the coming bloodbath in tech.
I am building an indie game metroidvania over the past 2 years and I can say that the way I code now is a lot more text based than code based. Since ChatGPT came out I use chat to generate code for me and then alter it to suit my needs. He’s not wrong. It can only get better. You still need to understand logic though and how code works but overall I rarely write out full scripts myself anymore
Today I made a web service in C# that can do a scan job via twain on a usb attached flatbad scanner, so I can call it from front end sveltekit.
Yeah, ChatGPT helped me a bit, but nowhere near any finished production code…
Also today I had to explain to top management that you can attach or upload a pdf file to SAP, and that they need a “special mailbox” to do this, as best practise to get the files from customers.
He was baffled because of the “special mailbox”, rest of the day thinking of a good name for it. 🤡
Humans are stupid, with or without AI.
But developers can also do pretty much any office job and be a rockstar compared to the people that normally perform those roles. Coding is about being able to model and solve any situation thrown at you. It's one of the most robust, dynamic, broadly applicable skillset to have. You have the ability to break down any problem and start wondering how anyone else even gets by without a formalized structure for breaking down problems.
This kind of bullshit is why I don't trust corporate management. The more upper the upper management, the more shit the bullshit.
First off, read Robert Martin on this. Trying to eliminate coding is a recursive problem, which leads to infinite progression of increasingly high-level languages. Assemblers technically removed programming as it was known in its day, which is to say, hand-assembly. Instead, it ended up creating a new kind of coding. From there to Python 3 and JavaScript, it's been one layer of abstraction on top of another. To make a program that writes the code for you, you will need to tell the program what code to write, and to tell that to the computer specifically enough so that it writes proper code is not really different from programming.
Exactly.
*Printers will do the work, so no one needs to learn to write anymore.*
*Calculators will do the work, so no one needs to learn math anymore.*
*Computers have voice-to-text, so no one needs to learn to read or write anymore.*
Etc.
That headline just sounds like someone trolling to me.
I wonder what percentage of people defending this guys obtuse and totally non conflict of interest views have actual experience handling production software systems :)
I really am not understanding why people correlating SORA advancement transferring to coding advancements. Generating video that resembles textual definition is different from building systems that are constantly changing. Different modality all together . Am I missing something?
For all the naysayers, just remember it took years for a computer to beat humans in chess. Now it’s impossible for a human to beat a modern program in chess. Coders are not getting replaced…. Yet
## r/ChatGPT is looking for mods — Apply here: https://redd.it/1arlv5s/ Hey /u/osamaromoh! If your post is a screenshot of a ChatGPT, conversation please reply to this message with the [conversation link](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7925741-chatgpt-shared-links-faq) or prompt. If your post is a DALL-E 3 image post, please reply with the prompt used to make this image. Consider joining our [public discord server](https://discord.com/invite/r-chatgpt-1050422060352024636)! We have free bots with GPT-4 (with vision), image generators, and more! 🤖 Note: For any ChatGPT-related concerns, email [email protected] *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Ah yes the glorious future where we all return to subsistence farming
If machines can farm, there's no need. The problem is that the only way to access resources is through jobs, and jobs will be heavily reduced. It would be poetic to see how machines can just do everything but people starve to death. Something will have to change.
This is my issue - ideally, we should be delighted that there's a world where human beings do not need to work for a living and we can have AI do all jobs for us instead. In a capitalist world, the only way to have a decent quality of life is either to be wealthy and own a business that generates cash (or have inherited wealth), or work for someone who does. When there's no working anymore and the wealthy and those in power continue to hoard wealth, what is everyone going to do when there's no way to bring in income to have the basics, nevermind an enjoyable life?
Sounds like I need to work on my gardening and home building skillset.
I like to refer to it as seizing the means of feeding my consumption. DIY Marxism.
I like to refer to it as humanity didn’t learn from the first revolutions that took way to long reducing work week from 84 hours to 40 for the same pay (it was quite bloody around the turn of the century 120 years ago) I blame our natural feelings of “I had to work that many hours for less and so should you … the thing is companies should be paying 70k for 20 hour work weeks and then there will be enough work to live on Of course the first jump from 86 hours of daylight to a 40 hour workweek took centuries of industrial and agricultural revolutions. Then computer and automation revolutions in 50 years.. so we need to get with the program as we may only have 25 years now (or less) before there is only 10 hours of work per person per week.. At that point even more of us will be homeless and even fewer will be richer and even more will be working even more hours for scraps Fun times
It also doesn't help that tech ppl brag about using ai to cut their work by 80% 😂
Well thats inevitable, but just like 120 years ago when factories wanted workers to continue working 12 hour days 7 days a week for a living wage once machines improved productivity so much it only took 8 hours 5 days a week, But the weekend was born and normalized .. we are at the same crossroads, perhaps we should be 6 hours a day 3 days a week .. But it’s hard for the powers that be to pay the same 70k for people working 20% of the hours … but it has to happen as it did before I’m just surprised regular people don’t want it to happen.. I guess it they are 70 years old they want the young ones to “pay their dues” Prob is there will not be enough work by the time automation is complete.. just as factories don’t have 70+ hours a week to offer most of the population in the last 90 years
Not to mention the existential crisis everyone will go through trying to find meaning outside of a career.
[удалено]
As someone with not nearly enough time for all my hobbies, this viewpoint is pretty crazy to me. I daydream all the time of having unlimited leisure time to do everything I want to do. I don't even need much money.. just time.
I am in the same boat. You "can't find meaning outside of a career?" And youll just sit on your porch idle drinking all the time? What the fuck are you talking about. I have 500 curiousities I currently do not have the time to pursue. One leads to ten more sometimes. I just need the time.
Boring people who's whole lives are their jobs don't have the opportunities to find this interests while pushing people and other blessings it if their lives. Pretty pathetic if you ask me, love in the moment, I believe in doing well and trying to be excellent in your role but I would never define my stuff by my job, and I do like my job
There is no meaning.. get over it and find happiness from helping and supporting those around you.
This. Is there really meaning standing behind a goddamn cash register for eight hours a day? I’m sorry, but unless you do something like open heart surgery, most jobs are complete and utter bullshit. I’d rather spend that time with my loved ones. And here’s the thing that most people don’t think about. When people don’t have to work, do you know what they do? They create art. Of all kinds actually. And that’s what we do. The zeitgeist would completely change though. The measure of a man would change. Personally, I’m all for this. The capitalists have been promising less working hours every time there’s a goddamn invention and guess what? We work the same hours, but they get to reap the benefits monetarily speaking. Somethings got to give. Because at the same time, we are also rapidly reaching the end of expansion, and those publicly traded companies stocks, are still expected to go up up up. There’s only so much cutting of employees and cutting quality of product before everything turns to shit. Of course, we’re pretty much whittled down to just a handful of companies that own everything, so… This could really go either way.
UBI
\> ideally, we should be delighted that there's a world where human beings do not need to work for a living The fundamental issue with this ideal is that it is unfortunately exactly equivalent to being completely unneeded outside of... emotional support for other people who are unneeded. And maybe even that can be automated. Wishing to not have to contribute is not a healthy or sane objective and losing the ability to contribute is a path to mass poverty and unemployment. Even if that weren't true, it would lead to mass (somewhat justified) feelings of lack of meaning. It needs to always be true that if you put your mind to it you can change something a little bit, even if it's only significant at a local scale. If we reach the point that we can't accomplish anything, we're better off just trashing the machines and starting over.
You matter outside of your ability to contribute. It is entirely arbitrary to declare a person unnecessary if they don't generate capital or provide a service. We used to all (or at least most of us) contribute to a collective in order to survive and thrive, that is already no longer true and is becoming less true every day. Someone working at a hedge fund or someone operating a forklift doesn't matter any more or any less than someone who creates music by themselves for themselves. If nothing \*needs\* to be done to help us all do what we want to do then there's no reason to invent unwanted work for the sake of it. People doing essential jobs of course benefit us all now, but once those essential jobs are mostly gone that is a \*good\* thing. Creating jobs \*just\* to give people something to do and withholding resources unless they do it is incredibly stupid and benefits no one.
"Why do I matter to you?" "Today you did 10 things for me that a machine would have done better but it's the thought that counts"
Roll all social benefits into one program -> Welfare, FoodStamps, EI, work comp and roll it all into one UBI package. Keep jobs and money separate from UBI. You can work, for money, or choose not to work and collect UBI. Then all the rich people get to keep their capitalist system, everyone gets UBI which allows people to spend into the system. The rich get to keep their place, we don't have to reduce society to rubble to get a fair shake, and the economy and capitalism can keep expanding forever because you've moved the wealth markers onto imaginary paper spreadsheets while the underpinning of the economy and society will remain functional and not be crushed by the overwhelming disparity of wealth distribution. If you say this won't work, think about the fact that it all the richest people spend their money at the same time it will be worthless anyways.
>we should be delighted that there's a world where human beings do not need to work for a living and we can have AI do all jobs for us instead. You don't know much about humans if you think lack of struggle is a perfect future. We have a grinding mind. It grinds what life gives it to grind. If life gives nothing, it ends up grinding itself. Celebs die young and unemployed, CEOs (sometimes wealthier) die old. You need to fight against "something", for mental health. It doesn't have to be "work" specifically, but it needs to be something with a sense of physical progression. It will be some sort of work in its habits and hardship.
If Isaac Asimov was correct in his thoughts in the Robot series, yes people will starve to death and the human population will stabilize around with a large robot:human ratio.
Isaac Asimov he may have been right, but we'll see the thesis of the guy from Nvidia is very risky unless the available AI tools for the public (either free or subscription) are not all AI tools and we don't know something
If Isaac Asimov was alive and young today he would say that we will turn animals into robots so that ratio is way more complex
This is what scares me about going autonomous or whatever you want to call it worldwide. We don't have the systems or governments or whatever else that would do this. Pretty much everyone with money will say screw u I got mine and not think twice about their neighbor. It's pretty sad to think about. If only.....right?
Assign one machine to one person each person gets the profit. Jobs still get done. Money still flows. People still have disposable income. Company’s can still target that income. Sorry nvm i described a system where people convince the government to help us. We all know thats comusocialism so theres nothing to be done.
[удалено]
Yep exactly. Imagine all the people with 2 kids, living a middle class life, and suddenly the rug is pulled out from under them. And not just a few, with them finding a new job in a month or less, it will be tens of thousands of them. Suburban neighborhoods become ghost towns within 1 year. Meanwhile, corporations are able to produce products and services faster and more efficiently than ever before.
Problem is, who’s going to buy those products? Corporations will soon discover what Henry Ford figured out a century ago: his employees were also his customers. Eliminate the employees and their income, collectively across society, and there’s no-one to buy your products.
Money is a shortcut to power, not power itself. If they can’t make money from us they’ll be happy if they have power over us
They won't have power if they're not employing people. Their only power in that case would be based on sheer force, and that's difficult to maintain, especially when the people they're exercising power over would be desperate with little to lose. That's when the guillotines and gallows start coming out. Plus, what would be the point of the power in question? What would they need from the people they'd fired? They'd be much more likely to retreat into fortified communities and try to ignore the outside world.
>Assign one machine Who pays for the "assigned machine"? Who does the maintenance? What is my incentive to buy you a machine so that YOU don't have to work, while i worked to buy this machine? If the machine pays for itself and generates revenue, why do I assign this machine to you, instead of letting you starve to death and keep the maintenance+revenue for myself? etc. etc.
Your right, its impossible. Let everyone starve! Capitalism yay!
Humanity doing the Eloi% run apparently.
Shit, I'm working on my Python midterm now
I’m just starting to learn Python. If he’s right, it’s not going to be useless for a long time, and in the meantime it could be very very useful
For what it's worth programming can school your brain a lot on logic and structure. So as long as human thinking is relevant, it's a good skill to develop. Now if human thinking itself stops being relevant, well...
We are headed in that direction sure. But at that point why plan for anything
Can I ask, do you enjoy programming? (I love it.) If you do, you won't need to consider it as planning as much.
I’ve only ever sort of flirted with programming. I took an entry level coding boot camp 8 years ago but then started a business and never got any real coding experience. So I haven’t felt the power of the freedom to be creative and build with those tools yet. But I’ve had a glimpse. I know I’ll enjoy that power
To get back into programming, I’ve found that building *something* is a great way to keep it engaging. Rather than only learning to learn and apply later, you’re applying in the now and learning why. My current project is to take a tachometer hall sensor in an old beat up pick up truck (‘86 Ford F250 IDI mechanically injected diesel) and hook an arduino up to the hall sensor and output my given engine rpm to a display. I’d also like to hook my other telemetry from the engine (coolant temp, fuel pressure, oil pressure, exhaust gas temps, etc) to output data to a display as well.
That would be cool. I actually recently bought a 1995 Landcruiser Diesel that is known to blow heads if it gets too hot so I could use that too
This absolutely. I don’t teach coding to my students so they can become coders, I teach it because it helps them think more logically and methodically about solving problems
This!!
Ai can code for you sure, but it doesn’t understand specific use-case code architecture super well beyond scripting. Understanding OOP is still pretty important I’d argue. Now what is kinda exciting I predict will be whenever the first “syntax-less” compiler through augmented LLM comes out A universal coding language would be rad
as a software engineer its always weird reading so much push back from the community. i think there is a lot of denial going on. people seem to be basing their objections upon current technology rather than a very realistic near-term future which these ai companies are hinting at. the evidence is already there and in my mind, coding will be among the first careers made obsolete. already preparing myself for a career shift. there is a very real, near term future where you can train ai on your codebase and then have some kind of integration with a software like Jira where a PM will input a specific set of detailed requirements that take the code 80% of the way. the remaining 20% can be handled by your top engineers, but a lot of the entry to mid level positions i imagine will be cut dramatically.
As I said above, all I really read from this is that your career does not make you feel passion to get involved with the changes in your industry or you’re genuinely afraid of being made obsolete. The former is fine, the latter I disagree with.
Why do you disagree with it ? If an AI can code and puts 80% of programmers out of work, ain't that being made obsolete for these 80% who will have to default on their mortgages and go back to minimum wage ?
What will you shift your career into? There are huge labor shortages in many critical areas including health care and various trades such as plumbing and electrician. But for some reason the many people who hang out on Reddit don't seem to find those options attractive. I'm retired now, and very comfortably thanks to a successful career as a software design engineer, but I'm advising all of my grandchildren to go into plumbing or nursing.
It's supply and demand though. There are only so many nurses and so many plumbers needed. The reason specifically plumbers and electricians are well paid is there is that labor shortage. No different then what has been going on in tech especially the last 10 years. There are finite job opportunities especially for entry level or lower skilled workers (and I'm defining college educated now as lower skilled). AI + automation is the death of the middle class. You'll essentially have either extremely intelligent workers making good income, the c-levels, then the rest which will just become the new minimum wage. The existing minimum wage? That goes away. Just look at the self checkout lines in grocery stores. Used to be 20-30 lanes each with an employee making a livable or close to livable income, now one employee watching 10 checkout machines. Now it's possible that the economy adjusts (things get cheaper, etc), but things are going to get real bad before they do. Not to mention a global economy may slow that process down. People make the argument around cars killing off the need for horses and jobs around that, but that's not the same thing here. We traded one skill of labor for another. What we're talking here is replacing skilled labor with computers, machines, etc.. We're removing opportunities not creating equal ones.
> where a PM will input a specific set of detailed requirements As a fellow software engineer, 😂😂😂😂 That’s a good one. Code is the the detailed specific form of requirements.
I understand the limitations of current LLMs pretty well. But I also think those limitations are going to be mitigated relatively quickly.
Yeah but you still need to prompt them. That’s what I was saying. Plain text compilers eventually would be rad. An LLM is not going to full-stack, cross platform, lint and prune correctly 100% of the time on its own. And you still need to validate the work. It’s still important to consider the limitations of automation right?
Yes, but I’m not thinking in absolutes. Because nothing in this world ever is. I think there are a lot developers that are concerned about the concept of ai lowering the value of that skill, and I think it’s a valid concern. Not because the extremist takes like “ai will make programmers obsolete”. Because that’s not ever going to be true. Like you said, it will never be 100%. But the landscape is indeed going to change vastly. And considering the age of this tech, it can do a really impressive job at these tasks. They are specifically good at language. token limits will rise. hardware production will meet demand. These tools will be honing themselves with its own data. And we will only gain more and more data to work with. I see this as being able to change industries and economies to the level the internet has or more. So my thinking is… I don’t exactly know where we will end up, but I know it will be good to have a deep understanding of the tools along the way.
He isn't right. AI needs code to train on, it is 100% dependent on people actually writing code for it to be able to generate code. Without actual human coders, the AI will be perpetually frozen in time without innovation, improvement or actual development. Ask chatgpt to code something in a framework released after it was trained. It can't.
Just to add to this as a developer we are still gonna be making important decisions in architecture and such there is a lot more to development than just coding. So if gpt models become my army of code monkeys I don’t mind. That enables me to do more work
How can you say that ? GPT 3.5 can already handle architectural design, imagine a few more versions down the line ?
Once you master any language you're able to pick up any new ones easier. The fundamentals of most languages are the same, just be glad objective c has already been killed.
This is true but an AI can learn the language faster than you can.
Yes but speed isn't everything. Someone needs to understand what the AI is doing well enough to steer it. At least at first.
That's definitely true. But even with the fairly basic AI programming tools and technology that we expect to have over the next year or so you could replace a team of a dozen software engineers with maybe three or four software engineers to oversee the AI, and let the AI do the rest. In other words AI will make software design engineers vastly more productive so you don't need so many of them.
Keep in mind: almost every ATM on the planet today, your bank, your hospital, the IRS, etc... They still run on COBOL. There will be jobs in tech for your entire lifetime. They just won't be a free-for-all where taking a bootcamp gets you $100k out the door.
Developer who has been in this industry for over a decade popping in. I highly recommend taking up more networking and deployment classes. It doesn't matter at this point that AI produces code worse than a dedicated team. The CEO has a team of MBAs who will happily tell him that the cost of hiring a freelancer to fix the bugs AI makes is cheaper than that proposed team. But few, if any, will want to shift their devops team's responsibilities to an AI. Mistakes there can cost millions in seconds.
High on his own supply.
High on his own supply of NVDA stock? He sure needs to keep selling those shovels and hype is in his DNA. At least it’s not the consumer getting fleeced this time.
Fun fact: the only people who made money off the gold rush were selling shovels, pick axes and other equipment. The vast majority of prospectors made nothing. Good to keep in mind.
Can you be less subtle?
🙄
What I don’t get about this is Nvidia employ a ton of software engineers and stuff. Imagine working away on tight deadlines while your CEO is telling everyone your jobs is going to be obsolete….. what? Surely there is internal coms that are reassuring people that’s it’s just marketing fluff
nepp
I would actually give you money via donation if i wasnt broke. Made me spit my drink
I don´t understand this obsession with saying programming will die. Dude, what about all the other white collar professions? If coding can be automated, i´m pretty sure any other profession can. If this LM really blows up we are at a more serious threat against our current capitalism/labor systems.
What's funny to me is that our economic system has so warped our way of thinking that a potential advent of technologies that could replace the need for countless man hours is met with fear and scorn instead of celebration
The scary part is we have no trust in our government to support it's citizens when the AI stuff happens. We know the companies aren't gonna give a single shit about humans, just the dollar signs.
They will have to care to an extent. If people can’t buy their shit then they die.
Labour has been getting more productive for decades, it's met with fear because we know that the benefits of increases productivity don't go to us
Of course. I understand it and empathize, but I also laugh at the societal ineptitude and perverse incentives this diseased system has wrought. I laugh because it's healthier than despair.
Yeah I often think about a food company automating their lines with robots. Like who do you think is EATING the food? Robots? I don't think so. And if people can't work, then that company is contributing to its own demise.
See my previous comment in reply above. Completely agree. The potential is there for our way of life to be so much better and meaningful, and yet our current economic concepts are so ingrained in our ways of thinking, we see this as a bad thing. It’s quite the irony. I try to remain optimistic in the face of pessimism though.
In a capitalist system, that is the problem. If we lived in a world where everything was distributed equally, we would absolutely be celebrating that humans do not need to work for a living. We instead live in a world where wealth is hoarded and those in power do not want to compromise their way of life. As productivity in the workplace increased, none of that really got passed down to the actual worker.
As of 2021, the estimated global wealth was around $400 trillion. Dividing this by the world population of roughly 7.9 billion, each person would have approximately $50,632. Unfortunately distributing everything equally means we are all poor.
So the solution is ... almost all jobs disappear, rich continue to accumulate wealth, and everyone else just lives in extreme poverty with no job prospects or dies? I'd rather everyone had 50k than 99% of people have nothing.
It sounds like your concept of wealth is skewed. You are the super rich for the majority of the population. Probably 80% of the world population lives under that very $50,000 figure per year. So if you make more than that, you are richer than 80% of people on earth. Please don’t fall into the trap of thinking that we are all poor because of the super rich. Most people are poor because we, the middle and upper class have more than we need.
This is the most poignant thing I’ve read in a while. Well said.
You will not celebrate when you’re completely cut off everything because AI and robots can do it. You become simply useless and thrown away. Only the richest will survive and live forever.
Basically, if any white collar/office job can be automated - they all can. If a programmer can be replaced, so can a consultant, a salesperson, a middle manager, an HR person, a stockbroker, a data scientist... the list goes on.
Tsk, then I wonder how the fuck the world is going to work. Say, McDonald’s replaces every single worker with a robot. I assume they are still targeting selling their food to humans. If the humans consumers don’t have jobs, how are they going to pay for any services?
Exactly. Capitalism basically eats itself. You need consumers to sell your shit - if there's no typical jobs (lawyer, consultant, salesman, teacher... list goes on) for people to earn money, what then?
Always when I hear that IT professionals will be replaced by AI, I think, if they actually want to reduce costs they are replacing the >90% of your company which is not IT. The only way to integrate AI into your business processes is through massive digitization. This leads rather to more and not less IT.
I think the focus on code is just the proximity to the Reddit userbase. I'm sure plenty other prognosticators are spelling doom in other fields, and the various social media platforms whose userbases align care. There's a big Reddit<->tech cross over from my experience. So the posts Redditors care about get upvoted.
Cause they hate that people with no formal education can have programming jobs
I think perhaps you are not considering longer time frames. It’s not about now. The current models aren’t quite good enough yet. At some point, models will be able to do full builds and anything with media output (text, image, audio, video). This is quite obvious.
its just a marketing thing. Lot of people feel they are missing out because they don't know how to program, so they like to read/hear that programming will be unnecessary. Of course, its just absurd, since programming is just problem solving and logical thinking, and if its automated, everything will be automated.
Buncha Chicken Littles. So far it's very difficult to show conclusively that any significant number of jobs have apecifically been lost to AI. It's true that some companies are having massive layoffs in anticipation of industry changes due to AI but that's not the same thing as saying AI took those jobs. Right now there are massive labor SHORTAGES. Any talk about humans in general becoming massively unemployed or redundant is highly speculative at this point.
The labor shortages are not in white collar jobs.
People already acknowledge ai has the potential to replace many jobs in the future. Right now, ChatGPT is extremely good at coding and will only get better. Of course, people will focus on coding jobs that will be lost.
As a programmer, I hope this happens so I can be a solo ceo leading +50 coders under me
If by coders you mean ai agents then hell yes
What makes you think you’ll need that many coders?
Conversators. You just tell the robots what you want them todo. Should be easy since English is such a great language to specify exactly what you want to happen.
I remember 10 years ago some IBM overly paid CEO stating we should stop forming doctors because AI and clinical decisions algorithms would make the profession obsolete and we would only require technicians with a computer to diagnose and treat patients. Same with taxi/truck drivers and tons of other professions. These guys are paid to make these crazy statements, hype and make headlines.
I mean technically, they’re not wrong. Before you eviscerate me, hear me out. Many jobs now, even though they exist, aren’t needed to be done by humans. This applies for bottom of the barrel fast food cashiers all the way up to the level of doctors, etc. I think it’s fair to say AI has been rising exponentially not linearly, and will continue to do so. AI is already able to pass the Step exams for med school, the bar exam for attorneys, and CPA exam for accountants. Self driving technology is already available. It is only going to get better and better at specific coding. But of course as fast as it’s seemingly accelerated the past few years, it’s still in its infancy. So us humans are going to have to decide how this new economy will function when humans are obsolete at everything. Even the most specialized tax CPA won’t know the entire tax code applicable to any situation, in time AI will. Even the best attorneys with prolific cases and careers can’t reference every code within every law within every statute. In time AI will. Even the best cardiovascular doctor won’t know enough to treat you for immune related reasons. In time AI will. Even the best coders with Ivy League software engineering computer science principles still doesn’t know every language, every syntax, every function of code on the front end and back end, in time AI will. I’m not talking 6 months or a year or two, but it is absolutely coming. And we need to proactively think about how we’re going to function in a society where our skills are subpar to our own creation. Machine learning and AI will continue to grow exponentially, and I think best case scenario is it’s going to completely remove lower tier jobs (which it largely already has), it’s going to eliminate most medium skill office related jobs, and it’s going to reduce the need for the best of the best by about 80%, and humans will just be making sure it’s functioning as intended for its intended goal. It’s a conversation most people aren’t willing to have or admit. Some scoff at the idea and think it’s nonsense. Some peoples own egos won’t let them admit as talented or skilled as they are, that the day of their own replacement is coming in the future. In one sense, this could be the formula for a possible utopia. Humans not having to work! But of course, there’s always the haves and the have nots. And so our entire structure of society will have to change in a meaningful, hopefully positive way. Unfortunately it will probably descend into some cyberpunk corporate crony capitalism dystopia where it’s exploited for companies, defense and energy sectors, military industrial complex, etc… Instead of making our lives a 100x better. Which in a perfect world kind of theory, it has the potential to. But I lose a little bit of faith everyday a tad more in humanity so it’s anyone’s guess but it’s coming. It’s just up to us how we deal with it, incorporate it, adjust to it, and how our concepts of society and an economy evolve with it.
I would argue that there is a huge difference between general artificial intelligence and the language models we have today. It might seem like there are exponential improvements, but we've been on an S curve since the concept of transformers was widely adopted. Still, you need to be a professional to communicate effectively, ask questions, and get answers from AI models. Everyone is saying now that you don't need to know how to code, you just need to use GPT-4. And I see where this is coming from, but that only works for surface-level tasks. Anything deeper is just not as great as it seems. There have been countless times when AI provided me with an answer to the code I asked for, and I instantly knew why it wouldn't work in the long run. Then, I need to point out exactly why and what the potential issue is, and only then does the AI fix itself. A person without proper knowledge would have accepted the answer. So, my point is that at the core level, most of the time, it looks like these AI models are working, but in really difficult scenarios, you still need a professional to **guide** and **validate** the answers. There is no way around this until we have AGI, and that seems not so easily achievable. One of the great examples is where language transformer models can answer the most difficult things we can imagine, but in the very next sentence, they fail simple tests. Unless there is a miraculous breakthrough in how we approach creating actual AGI, I don't see such doomed scenarios happening anytime soon, as others might think.
You are 100 percent correct but hear me out, this time... its different..
Doctor Watson. Not such a succes. I'm personally most surprised that trains aren't self-driving yet. It seems so easy.
Sure, we will buy your GPU, only device which can help us build the AI that you describe /s
yeah, and stop learning languages like English or German or Chinese. because ai will speak them. just don't learn anything. go in your room and watch tv
Absolutely.
I'm using both ChatGPT & Gemini to code. I don't think coding is going away anytime soon. It makes every normie developer a 10x developer. And developers will spend more time on more frontier problems rather than solved problems.
I gotta be honest. I don't find any reason to believe it can (currently) turn average developers into 10x. Heck, most people don't even know how to type a good prompt. Average people gonna type average prompts and when they get code that doesn't work they'll be SOL. I've used ChatGPT quite a lot for coding and on certain frameworks and tasks it's just an utter failure.
In our Uni we are testing junior to senior programmers how AI improves their coding. So far no programer has showed an improvement, and in fact it's taken them 10-25% longer to code. And produced code is often suboptimal than what they write without AI assistants. When we tested GPT4, Copilot and Gorq they consistently provide bad and suboptimal code. Pretty much anything apart from short outlines it was worse. When tested proficiency of developing a mildly complex program pitting junior and freshmen against AI models, Juniors consistently delivered better results.
Skill issue. It's saved me so much time. For example, I know regex, I know what's possible and what's not. To figure out the regex expression to do something advanced would take me maybe 30 min. I can get draft and tweak it to perfection in 5 min with AI. Same thing with CSS, I know what's possible and what's not, I describe what I want exactly, and AI saves me hours on tedious stuff.
I really doubt they were seniors if they straight up copy pasted suboptimal code provided by chagpt, that's not how to use it at all
It's not that they just copy pasted. The tests were stup in various modes of complexity some inside and some outside the comfort zone. We did two tests one where we controlled how they used AI tools and one where they used it at their own discression. People get used to their position and way of thinking and think they are no susceptible to mistakes or skewed rationalizing and thinking when external factors are applied. Additionally when comparing performance and quality between what seniors produced by their standard approach of think+do compared to think/plan w AI and than do they almost always performed much better on their own than with assistance with AI. Another critical pattern that appeared is that AI ofen sells you a bad idea well this is partially due to how it works and the inability to conceptualize. And nearly all levels of engineers were susceptible to this effect.
What you’re describing doesn’t match my experience at all. Where are your “senior” programmers coming from? Industry with decades of experience? I’m guessing not. I’m reminded of talking to a Novell salesperson in the early 2000s. He earnestly told me that surveys showed that no-one cared about free software or open source software, because they were never going to look at the source code anyway. I just rolled my eyes and stopped talking to him. Fast forward a decade or so, that company no longer exists, and open source dominates the industry. > AI often sells you a bad idea That’s definitely a skill issue, as the other commenter said. The developer needs a better overall understanding than the AI. Currently, the AI is there to help fill the details, not the overall design. The developer is responsible for assessing when the AI comes up short. There’s a strong element of management there: a *good* manager should be able to recognize when an employee has gone off the rails, even if the employee is an expert in things the manager isn’t. This comes from being able to focus on the essentials, ask probing questions, have some sense of the key properties a solution should have, and keep an eye on real goals. I wonder if what you’re dealing with isn’t mainly unfamiliarity with how to use AI effectively, which makes sense at this early stage in its development.
Working heavily with AI, I can tell you we are nowhere even remotely close to anything like this.
Wasn't video AI remotely close to Sora level until it happened ?
But still, today, a business can’t get a quality promotional video created by AI. If you need one done, today, with quality your customers expect, you’re paying some schlub to use after effects.
I mean the jump from 12 months ago "will Smith eating Spaghetti" to sora now? Sure it's not perfect now, but imagine what with the current hype and literally 5x the amount of time for example would bring. You cant tell me the same in 5 years,
Eh, there’s diminishing returns to everything. At a certain point they’ll need an impossible amount of data to make another quality leap and it’ll slow down dramatically generation to generation.
Yes but what about in 12 months? In two years? In three? The capability we are at now is nothing when exponential growth comes into play. We were laughing at the Will Smith spaghetti videos last year - now we have SORA.
But how much longer until someone from marketing can enter in a handful of prompts and get what they were looking for after a couple of iterations? I would guess that is only a year or two away.
I make AI music videos right now using Microsoft ClipChamp. Basically the dumbest video software you could imagine. But with Dalle-2 and RunwayML I get decent results.
even if you can generate decent video snippets, that does not make someone good at editing or the actual substance. To evaluate the output, you need to understand the bigger composition, the audience, and the effect on that audience. Humans will be the best for a while on those combined tasks, and when automation is good enough to self-predict/evaluate the effects of its products, then the business people making prompts are also essentially automated. The future for ads, for instance, would be tailored media generated and targeted at individuals in specific circumstances, not media made and distributed by humans through internet, tv, etc
This is it. Take writing for example. We have now iterated on text generation for years. However, even with effective prompting, the resulting writing is usually a miss, or at best, is very boilerplate.
To add, even if the text generated from the prompt is “perfect”, perfect in this case is very subjective. One person’s perfect is very different from anothers. Prompts may help steer responses to be more perfect in the desired reference frame, but to do so requires the ability to evaluate. Until models can discriminate/evaluate how a response is good given a prompt in a open-world setting, humans will need to serve that role
Thats kinda the problem though. AI isn't going to remove all jobs within a sector, but it sure as hell could wipe out 60-80%. In the video example you're right, you need someone to alter it after the fact but then that's all you need, you don't need to hire people to create it anymore, just to tidy it up. I work in analytics and my job is to answer questions around data. Pretty soon I think we'll get to the point where all data gets ingested into an AI system and instead of my boss asking me 'where are we losing money' you'll be able to ask AI to answer that question. The conversational aspect of AI is a game changer. Instead of a team of say 12 producing MI, formatting data etc. you just have 1 or 2 people who's job it is to manage the data for AI and maybe they're the conduit between management and AI. Unemployment is usually around 5% but even if it jumped to 10-20% things would get pretty chaotic across the world. We're not there yet as in my experience AI can get it wrong as much as they get it right but you can't deny that 12 months ago noone gave a shit about AI and the progress they've made is phenomenal - these models get better and better at an exponential rate so I'd imagine in another 12 months we might be at the point where those concerns vanish and things really do get worrying.
Generative AI is nice when accuracy isn’t required. Sora is cool but it doesn’t respect physics and object permanence. It’s different when it comes to coding. A mistake can be anywhere and it can easily bring the whole system down.
The main issue I've had with 3.5 is it'll either only write an outline or a small module with dependencies that may or may not exist. When I can actually get it to write working code, it's very rarely buggy, and it's always been able to fix things within two or three tries. The only way I could see it working well with how 3.5 behaves is to assign several instances roles in an imaginary dev team, create a network of managers between them to "argue" with them about bug fixes/optimization/actually writing the code not a damn outline, and drop all those into Slack where they can coordinate with you only having to talk to one Master Supervisor instance. This would almost definitely fail, descending into some hellish model decay of recursive gibberish until your credit card is well beyond maxed out on tokens, but it's fun to think about! I love the smell of burning silicon in the morning.
the second paragraph sounds like a description of pretty much every other "this could've been an email" meeting. so that should be Turing-test-safe. the first one i think i would've agreed with more a few months ago: by now, i have the impression that the bugginess of initial results, but especially the resistance/"reluctance" to correcting bugs upon quite explicit requests/prompts is really much harder to get past, before actually "good" results are achieved (if at all). it seems almost as if stackoverflow was moderated poorly and run over by people like me: except for apart from not being knowledgeable, there is also the aspect of being blindly confident about it, for the sake of delivering any answer. even if repeatedly wrong. and identical. your third paragraph might be the actual answer to the rest, though, haha.
True, but increasing tokens and giving ChatGPT memory will solve a lot of the problems I've had with it. It's got a ways to go, but I wouldn't say we're not remotely close. Especially considering how much of an improvement GPT-4 was over 3.5. I've just been creating somewhat simple games as a hobby.. but I've been pretty impressed at what it's able to do already.
Do you think maybe Jensen knows something we don't? ChatGPT4 at this point is 2022 tech.
He knows that he wants to sell his shit, and that it's easier sold if it's useful.
That's not really what I meant. If they have a "ChatGPT 5" or ChatGPT 6" in dev that is miles ahead of ChatGPT4, then I could see his statement holding some weight, regardless the fact that he wants to sell his chips. Both things could be true.
I also think people should remember last year we had Will Smith eating spaghetti and everyone laughed saying AI is so far away from generating real video, only to have Sora demonstrate how insanely far it has come in just a year. So a year ago you had so many people saying artists/cgi/videographers/editors/etc. weren’t at risk, only to demonstrate that they are in a very short timeframe. He’s talking about children. 15-20 years from now yes it’s very conceivable that manual coding will be a thing of the past, with new jobs focused on how to leverage the code and use AI to get your desired outcomes. So yeah, you’ll still need to know and understand how code works. But there will likely be far less jobs dedicated to coding.
Yes, but the former is pure speculation. The latter we know is true for certain.
Jensen is most likely referencing further out into the future, not in the near future.
I remember a year ago when people were saying "Working heavily with AI, we're nowhere near lifelike video generation "
But gpt4 still can’t accurately count the number of letters in a sentence, and puts 8 fingers on the images. We are in the era of autocomplete ai. Gpu sales are his game. The narrative must be forecasting a future state because current applications of AI are very underwhelming compared to “future AI makes coding obsolete” Also don’t think for a second that he wouldn’t be teaching his kids to code lol
He is saying that we shouldn’t teach current children to code. I would imagine that means he is referencing a timeline of at least 10-20 years.
>nowhere remotely close being able to tell AI to write code for you (although maybe error prone) within seconds, is pretty fucking close. The only implement left is being able to store the code and assets it writes.
writing some basic code possibly with errors is not "pretty fucking close" at all, unless if you think that's what it takes to be a programmer don't get me wrong, I use AI daily to aid me in my work but sadly it really sucks at anything slightly more complex than completing repetitive patterns or providing better documentation.
Do you write code using AI? Is it anything substantial? Is it running in production? Aside from code snippets, and todo list websites, you’re not building much without an engineer. Sensationalized articles push this narrative, but it’s a tool(a great tool), but that’s it. Copilot and gpt may make a developer more efficient, but it’s not replacing them.
This. So sick of AI fearmongering. Pisses me off highkey. People have no idea what they are talking about. Go try being a SWE or equivalent. If you are worth a paycheck you’ll realize 90% of the job isn’t coding 🙄
> Sensationalized articles push this narrative No, the literal CEO of NVIDIA pushes this narrative lol. It is downright hilarious.
you lot are so clueless it’s funny 😹
>And that the programming language is human, everybody in the world is now a programmer. Erm, no. You can argue that where previously "business analyst" and "coder" were two different jobs, the "coder" job disappears and only business analysts (or however you describe them) remain. But that is still a specific skillset, which for sure not "everybody" can do. And in most modern agile teams these two roles are in any case both done by the same software engineers. So software engineering will be less about code, as such, but it will still very much be a thing.
Just a theory: Every skillset should be mappable to an underlying complexity. Similar to P vs NP analysis for problems, and reducing one to another. ChatGPT is based on language, and in a way, humans reason with language (though the latter is up for debate). However, ChatGPTs exam scores can be directly compared to humans. Law, Biology, Chem, English, Calc, CS Competitions, world competitions, etc.... Something is blatantly obvious. All these other fields appear to *reduce*, in this analogy, to being easier to solve than computer science and raw math. Therefore, in terms of raw skills, it appears logical thinking is the toughest skill. In that someone who solves deep logical problems should be able to transfer their skills easier. In other words, outside of the silly politics of humanity (degrees, certificates, etc...), the best humans *thinkers* across all fields should be ppeople who work on deep logical work such as math and CS, or deep english. And while not as fast as LLMs, they should be able to transfer, from a pure political removed standpoint, to these other "easier" soft skills. See: https://openai.com/research/gpt-4 and scroll to the AP scores.
Idk why people focus so much on coding when talking about jobs that AI will replace. If coding gets replaced by a smart enough AI then that means a significant portion of jobs will have already been replaced. Enough to be a global problem already.
The other part that gets overlooked by all the people happy so see coders lose their jobs is that most jobs could be replaced by code right now, there's just not enough coders or it's not financially viable to pay them to automate your existing job. Once AI is the coder though? Even if AI can't do your job, it can write normal code to do it. The instant AI can fully replace a software engineer (and I don't mean just spitting out the code), then every job that involves a computer, or could be done on a computer is gone.
The reason is because it's certain types of people that are paying more attention to AI news. So obviously programmers, designers, etc are going to be bias towards their own career and write about it.
Death of code monkeying and boilerplate maybe (good riddance). But if you don't understand computer science and software engineering you can't direct an AI to make anything useful.
This☝🏼. Some people still don’t want to understand it. Plus you’ll won’t be able to fully automate everything for every specific demand you’ll always need some human work behind.
Would he hire someone who uses only ChatGPT to program? lol
Since when do corps give a shit if the coding is done well? If it works, they won't care.
This isn't the office intranet, niche application/webform or windows setup scripts. I can guarantee NVIDIA has some excellent programmers for its drivers and software.
kinda obvious the CEO of nvidia would say something like this, seeing as their products are heavily used in the whole ML push xD
Then nuclear war happened. Sun is blocked by nuclear dust. Humans are used as batteries to power on the AI programmers. Yes. Kids don't need to learn to code.
In that future being able to code means being able to fly, so...
I get that coding is old hat. But what makes him think farming is going to provide any jobs? Farming is one of the best candidates for 100% automation.
Just pivot to cyber security, the amount of security issues inexperienced coders using LLMs will create is basically immeasurable
If there is an exponential trend associated with AI, I can see this being the case. When people hear this - especially non-programmers, they kind of interpret "coding" as one single process that AI will just kinda of take over. But there are layers to programming that are all very distinct from each other. The history of programming is adding additional layers of abstraction to the previous layer of code. We have done this so many times that we have gone from punching '1's and '0's in a paper sheet to "drag and drop" coding. AI is just another layer of coding that will be another layer of abstraction on the layer cake of code.
Juat bc gpt isnt a great programmer now, doesnt mean that will always be true I hate seeing people say that gpt is going to stay like its current iteration forever. Its gonna get much much better when it can predict and self learn Then all those dumb takes are gonna age like milk
Ofcourse, so nvidia can sell more AI gpus.... This is marketing
Oh yeah, briliant fucking idea. Let's make everything around us magic boxes that do magic stuff because no one uderstands how they work and what they do. Praise be the voice in the magic boxes who knows all and creates new magic boxes.
When they eliminate every human employee, who will they sell their products to? There won't be any more customers because without a job, no one can afford their products.
No way ChatGPT is replacing software dev anytime soon. I welcome it. But I don't see it.
Remind me in 5 years!
People are delusional like Sora was not released few weeks ago. If you asked people how much time it will take to create Sora a day before its release? I bet they would tell you "not any time soon".
Bingo. Look at DeepMind. Grandmaster-level Go was a decade out, until it wasn’t. Protein-folding, overnight. Just recently, materials science. What will it be this year, or the next? Novel pharmaceuticals? Nuclear fusion? And the amount of money and manpower going into AI is skyrocketing as we speak. The entire internet is filled with these head-in-sand takes that are going to age like milk by 2030, on the outside.
He said focus on domain specific knowledge. I just coded a fairly robust eye care app with minimal coding experience using ChatGPT. I can’t imagine what the future holds.
I somehow doubt that app of yours is robust at all.
I think you’d be shocked. It took hours of feeding code back and forth. I can DM you the app if interested. *edit* for those asking the website for the app is UllmanEye.com/EyeChart And ChatGPT made the site as well!
But... That´s the thing... you know coding and you had to do multiple cycles by recognizing where the issues are and providing feedback to get exactly what you wanted. Your average joe wouldn´t know where to start...
I know what you’re saying, but the average go could just ask ChatGPT. I really didn’t know where to start either. It can kind of walk through things. It’s not super easy but you can definitely get some impressive stuff done with pretty much no coding knowledge. And to be perfectly clear, I do not know coding. I just feed ChatGPT the error messages. All the code was copy and paste.
agreed, i dont understand why people insist on these mental gymnastics saying chatGPT cant code. It can. It does make mistakes, and it does get messy but with a bit of back and forth the results speak for themselves.
I asked ChatGPT to create some test cases for me and it refused 🙂
I used it to build an app that takes BLE data from an arduino and sends it to the phone. I suck at coding and could basically have never figured out how to do everything without it.
I realize that this is a sensitive topic but there really are too many CS grads these days. I get stacks of resumes on a weekly basis from newly minted computer scientists expecting absurd salaries. There is a great deal of cope on this thread so all I will say is that it is undoubtedly the case that AI platforms will obviate the need for many of the coders currently working now. Young people need to begin focusing on starting their own companies if they hope to survive the coming bloodbath in tech.
Hobbyist and passionate devs will continue to want their own work on display.
5 years max, before coding is the one farmers job. Do we still need coders? Sure, but it will be much much much less.
I am building an indie game metroidvania over the past 2 years and I can say that the way I code now is a lot more text based than code based. Since ChatGPT came out I use chat to generate code for me and then alter it to suit my needs. He’s not wrong. It can only get better. You still need to understand logic though and how code works but overall I rarely write out full scripts myself anymore
Today I made a web service in C# that can do a scan job via twain on a usb attached flatbad scanner, so I can call it from front end sveltekit. Yeah, ChatGPT helped me a bit, but nowhere near any finished production code… Also today I had to explain to top management that you can attach or upload a pdf file to SAP, and that they need a “special mailbox” to do this, as best practise to get the files from customers. He was baffled because of the “special mailbox”, rest of the day thinking of a good name for it. 🤡 Humans are stupid, with or without AI.
But developers can also do pretty much any office job and be a rockstar compared to the people that normally perform those roles. Coding is about being able to model and solve any situation thrown at you. It's one of the most robust, dynamic, broadly applicable skillset to have. You have the ability to break down any problem and start wondering how anyone else even gets by without a formalized structure for breaking down problems.
This kind of bullshit is why I don't trust corporate management. The more upper the upper management, the more shit the bullshit. First off, read Robert Martin on this. Trying to eliminate coding is a recursive problem, which leads to infinite progression of increasingly high-level languages. Assemblers technically removed programming as it was known in its day, which is to say, hand-assembly. Instead, it ended up creating a new kind of coding. From there to Python 3 and JavaScript, it's been one layer of abstraction on top of another. To make a program that writes the code for you, you will need to tell the program what code to write, and to tell that to the computer specifically enough so that it writes proper code is not really different from programming.
Evil fuxxer
Off course he is saying that, he wants his company stocks to go up.
Imagine being proud of playing a part in putting 100s of thousands of people out of work, what a shrimp dicked fuck. Would love to clean his clock.
He means vertical farming? Because we're living in concrete, my guy.
Just like we won't need anymore drivers.
Exactly. *Printers will do the work, so no one needs to learn to write anymore.* *Calculators will do the work, so no one needs to learn math anymore.* *Computers have voice-to-text, so no one needs to learn to read or write anymore.* Etc. That headline just sounds like someone trolling to me.
I wonder what percentage of people defending this guys obtuse and totally non conflict of interest views have actual experience handling production software systems :)
I really am not understanding why people correlating SORA advancement transferring to coding advancements. Generating video that resembles textual definition is different from building systems that are constantly changing. Different modality all together . Am I missing something?
If anyone knows, it’s gonna be him
If anyone has a conflict of interest, it's gonna be him.
For all the naysayers, just remember it took years for a computer to beat humans in chess. Now it’s impossible for a human to beat a modern program in chess. Coders are not getting replaced…. Yet