this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2024
201 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13533 readers
1280 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

(despite david simon being a shitlib)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Llituro@hexbear.net 27 points 4 months ago (5 children)

the only use of ai i think is probably remotely useful is programmers using it to help write new code. not people who aren't experienced at software development mind you, they don't get too much of chatgpt, but someone that knows what they're doing with copilot to copy-paste someone's completely correct implementation, that seems useful. at least to people i've talked to.

[–] SoyViking@hexbear.net 31 points 4 months ago

It is very useful for coding because that is one of the few places where unoriginal repetitive solutions are often desirable. But even with coding you have to know what to tell the LLM to do and you have to be able to read and understand the output to make sure it works as intended.

LLM's are a useful too for programmers to automate repetitive tasks but it is nowhere near bearing able to produce usable applications by itself. I am not worried that I'll be replaced by a robot anytime soon.

Those who should be worried about their jobs are people in places like customer support or government services directed at people who doesn't matter to the ruling class. In these cases the powers that be have little holding them from replacing human interactions with significantly worse interactions with a LLM. Nobody important gives a shit if some schmuck can't cancel their cable subscription or gets their employment benefits cut because the computer had a hiccup.

[–] macerated_baby_presidents@hexbear.net 22 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

IMO no, for two reasons:

  • reading code is harder than writing it. If the AI writes you a standard implementation, you still have to read it to make sure it's correct. So that's more work than just doing it yourself
  • AI will produce code that looks right. Since it can't understand anything that's all it does, next most likely token == most correct-looking solution. But when the obvious solution is not the right one, you now have deceptively incorrect code, specifically and solely designed to look correct.

I've never used Copilot myself but pair programmed with someone who used it, and it seemed like he spent more time messing with the output than it would have taken to write it himself.

[–] Findom_DeLuise@hexbear.net 11 points 4 months ago

More like helping programmers write e-mails to needy project managers who need a status update on that feature ticket every 11 hemiseconds

[–] Cysioland@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 4 months ago

I use JetBrains "local LLM" thingy and it's good at suggesting the very obvious, trivial code that I would write anyway, so it just saves me keystrokes

[–] gaycomputeruser@hexbear.net 5 points 4 months ago

It's clearly become a crutch for some programmers. I remember talking to someone who does ai research and openly admitted that most of the people in their lab couldn't code and that the outputs from chatgpt where sufficient to do their work.