this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

1489 readers
18 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

MRW 38 of the 39 comments have almost nothing to do with the article

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago

in response to Bender pointing out that ChatGPT and its competitors simply encode relationships between words and have no concept of referent or meaning, which is a devastating critique of what the technology actually does, the absolute best response he can muster for his work is "yeah, but humans don't do anything more complicated than that". I mean, speak for yourself Sam: the rest of us have some concept of semiotics, and we can do things like identify anagrams or count the number of letters in a word, which requires a level of recursivity that's beyond what ChatGPT can muster.

Boom Shanka (emphasis added)

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

'i am a stochastic parrot and so are u' reminds me of " In his desperation to have produced reality through computation, he denigrates actual reality by equating it to computation" (from this review/analysis of the devs series). A pattern annoying common among the LLM AI fans.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (10 children)

After all, there's almost nothing that ChatGPT is actually useful for.

It's takes like this that just discredit the rest of the text.

You can dislike LLM AI for its environmental impact or questionable interpretation of fair use when it comes to intellectual property. But pretending it's actually useless just makes someone seem like they aren't dissimilar to a Drama YouTuber jumping in on whatever the latest on-trend thing to hate is.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (5 children)

"Almost nothing" is not the same as "actually useless". The former is saying the applications are limited, which is true.

LLMs are fine for fictional interactions, as in things that appear to be real but aren't. They suck at anything that involves being reliably factual, which is most things including all the stupid places LLMs and other AI are being jammed in to despite being consistely wrong, which tech bros love to call hallucinations.

They have LIMITED applications, but are being implemented as useful for everything.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Let's be real here: when people hear the word AI or LLM they don't think of any of the applications of ML that you might slap the label "potentially useful" on (notwithstanding the fact that many of them also are in a all-that-glitters-is-not-gold--kinda situation). The first thing that comes to mind for almost everyone is shitty autoplag like ChatGPT which is also what the author explicitly mentions.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (11 children)

I'm saying ChatGPT is not useless.

I'm a senior software engineer and I make use of it several times a week either directly or via things built on top of it. Yes you can't trust it will be perfect, but I can't trust a junior engineer to be perfect either—code review is something I've done long before AI and will continue to do long into the future.

I empirically work quicker with it than without and the engineers I know who are still avoiding it work noticeably slower. If it was useless this would not be the case.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago

I’m a senior software engineer

Good. Thanks for telling us your opinion's worthless.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago

Another professional here. Lemmy really isn’t a place where you’re going to find people listening to what you have to say and critically examining their existing positions. You’re right, and you’re going to get downvoted for it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I’m a senior software engineer

Nice, me too, and whenever some tech-brained C-suite bozo tries to mansplain to me why LLMs will make me more efficient, I smile, nod politely, and move on, because at this point I don't think I can make the case that pasting AI slop into prod is objectively a worse idea than pasting Stack Overflow answers into prod.

At the end of the day, if I want to insert a snippet (which I don't have to double-check, mind you), auto-format my code, or organize my imports, which are all things I might use ChatGPT for if I didn't mind all the other baggage that comes along with it, Emacs (or Vim, if you swing that way) does this just fine and has done so for over 20 years.

I empirically work quicker with it than without and the engineers I know who are still avoiding it work noticeably slower.

If LOC/min or a similar metric is used to measure efficiency at your company, I am genuinely sorry.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (4 children)

I agree with you on the examples listed, there are much better tools than an LLM for that. And I agree no one should be copy and pasting without consideration, that's a misuse of these tools.

I'd say my main uses are kicking off a new test suite (obviously you need to go and check the assertions are what you expect, but it's usually about 95% there) which has gone from a decent percentage of the work for a feature down to an almost negligible amount of time. This one also results in me enjoying my job a bit more now too as I've always found writing tests a bit of a drudgery.

The other big use for me is that my organisation is pretty big and has a hefty amount of code (a good couple of thousand repos at least), we have a tool that's based on GPT which has processed all the code, so you can now ask queries about internal stuff that may not be well documented or particularly obvious. This one saves a load of time because I now don't always have to do the Slack merry go round to try and find an engineer that knows about what I'm looking for—sometimes it's still unavoidable, but they're less frequent moments now.

If LOC/min or a similar metric is used to measure efficiency at your company, I am genuinely sorry.

It's tied to OKR completion, which is generally based around delivery. If you deliver more feature work, it generally means your team's scores will be higher and assuming your manager is aware of your contributions, that translates to a bigger bonus. It's more of a carrot than a stick situation IMO, I could work less hard if I didn't want the extra money.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago

I don’t know how or why you’re getting lambasted. You make excellent points and ever making outlandish claims, just a common sense approach.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago

I worked at one of the biggest AI companies and their internal AI question/answer was dogshit for anything that could be answered by someone with a single fold in their brain. Maybe your co has a much better one, but like most others, I'm gonna go with the smooth brain hypothesis here.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (3 children)

In this and other use cases I call it a pretty effective search engine, instead of scrolling through stackexchange after clicking between google ads, you get the cleaned up example code you needed. Not a Chat with any intelligence though.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (2 children)

"despite the many people who have shown time and time and time again that it definitely does not do fine detail well and will often present shit that just 10000% was not in the source material, I still believe that it is right all the time and gives me perfectly clean code. it is them, not I, that are the rubes"

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (2 children)

The problem with stuff like this is not knowing when you dont know. People who had not read the books SSC Scott was reviewing didnt know he had missed the points (or not read the book at all) till people pointed it out in the comments. But the reviews stay up.

Anyway this stuff always feels like a huge motte bailey, where we go from 'it has some uses' to 'it has some uses if you are a domain expert who checks the output diligently' back to 'some general use'.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago

Ahah I'm totally with you, I just personally know people that love it because they have never learned how to use a search engine. And these generalist generative AIs are trained on gobbled up internet basically, while also generating so many dangerous mistakes, I've read enough horror stories.

I'm in science and I'm not interested in ChatGPT, wouldn't trust it with a pancake recipe. Even if it was useful to me I wouldn't trust the vendor lock-in or enshittification that's gonna come after I get dependent on aa tool in the cloud.

A local LLM on cheap or widely available hardware with reproducible input / output? Then I'm interested.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (5 children)

I’m a senior software engineer

ah, a señor software engineer. excusé-moi monsoir, let me back up and try once more to respect your opinion

uh, wait:

but I can’t trust a junior engineer to be perfect either

whoops no, sorry, can't do it.

jesus fuck I hope the poor bastards that under you find some other place real soon, you sound like a godawful leader

and the engineers I know who are still avoiding it work noticeably slower

yep yep! as we all know, velocity is all that matters! crank that handle, produce those features! the factory must flow!!

fucking christ almighty. step away from the keyboard. go become a logger instead. your opinions (and/or the shit you're saying) is a big part of everything that's wrong with industry.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

and the engineers I know who are still avoiding it work noticeably slower

yep yep! as we all know, velocity is all that matters! crank that handle, produce those features! the factory must flow!!

and you fucking know what? it's not even just me being a snide motherfucker, this rant is literally fucking supported by data:

The survey found that 75.9% of respondents (of roughly 3,000* people surveyed) are relying on AI for at least part of their job responsibilities, with code writing, summarizing information, code explanation, code optimization, and documentation taking the top five types of tasks that rely on AI assistance. Furthermore, 75% of respondents reported productivity gains from using AI. ... As we just discussed in the above findings, roughly 75% of people report using AI as part of their jobs and report that AI makes them more productive.

And yet, in this same survey we get these findings:

if AI adoption increases by 25%, time spent doing valuable work is estimated to decrease 2.6% if AI adoption increases by 25%, estimated throughput delivery is expected to decrease by 1.5% if AI adoption increases by 25%, estimated delivery stability is expected to decrease by 7.2%

and that's a report sponsored and managed right from the fucking lying cloud company, no less. a report they sponsor, run, manage, and publish is openly admitting this shit. that is how much this shit doesn't fucking work the way you sell it to be doing.

but no, we should trust your driveby bullshit. motherfucker.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Lol, using a survey to try and claim that your argument is "supported by data".

Of course the people who use Big Autocorrect think it's useful, they're still using it. You've produced a tautology and haven't even noticed. XD

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

it may be a shock to learn this, but asking people things is how you find things out from them

I know it requires speaking to humans, alas, c’est la vie

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

It may be a shock to learn this, but asking people things is how you find out what they think, not what is true.

I know proof requires more than just speaking to humans, alas, c'est la vie.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

did you know the report also publishes the details of its analysis methodology?

my god, where are you people coming from today

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (3 children)

Did you know that all reputable surveys publish their methodology?

Did you know that, regardless of how you analyze the results, a survey is still just a survey?

If LLMs were worth the hype then you'd have actual proof of utility, not just sentiment.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago

If LLMs were worth the hype then you’d have actual proof of utility

you think I'm promptfan-posting? impressive.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (3 children)

let me back up and try once more to respect your opinion

The point of me saying that was to imply I've been in the industry for a couple of decades, and have a good amount of experience from before all this. It wasn't any kind of appeal to authority, but I can see how you can read it that way.

jesus fuck I hope the poor bastards that under you find some other place real soon, you sound like a godawful leader

I'm sorry, do you trust junior engineers blindly? That's gonna lead to a much worse outcome than if they get feedback when they do something wrong. Frankly, I don't trust any engineer to be perfect, we're humans and humans make mistakes, that's why we do code review as a fundamental skill in this industry. It's one of the primary ways for people to develop their ability.

yep yep! as we all know, velocity is all that matters! crank that handle, produce those features! the factory must flow!!

In an industry where many companies are tightening the belt, yes it's important to perform well—I kinda want to keep my job and ideally get a good bonus. It would be pretty foolish to leave free productivity on the table when the alternative is working harder to bridge the gap, where I could spend that energy doing more productive stuff.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I’m sorry, do you trust junior engineers blindly?

as a starting position, fucking YES. you know why I hired that person? because I believe they can do the job and grow in it. you know what happens if they make a mistake? I give them all the goddamn backup they need to handle it and grow.

"this is why code review is so important" jfc. you're one of those "I've worked here for 4 years and I'm a senior" types, aren't you

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (2 children)

So you don't do code review? Something that's pretty much industry standard?

What on earth do you work on where it's inconsequential to trust someone new to the industry blindly?

If I could trust someone anything remotely close to "blindly", they absolutely would not have been hired as a junior.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

yep yep. no code review. no version control either. that’s weak shit only babies use. over here you deploy patches by live editing app memory in production, and you update the codebase by editing the central repo using vscode remote. everyone has access to it because monorepos are what google do and so do we.

you have a 100% correct comprehension takeaway of what I said, well done!

jfc no wonder you’re fine with LLMs

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Interesting you bring up reading comprehension because this whole thread started with me saying I would not trust a junior engineer to be perfect or trust them blindly.

You proceed to die on the hill that you would do that for some reason, despite now implying that you do, in fact, do code reviews—which we do because people can't be trusted to be perfect

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (2 children)

projection belongs in cinemas and SFPs, don't go casting your misunderstandings onto me

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The comments are all there if you want to read again and point out how that's not true.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago

someone who thinks "the buck stops here => nothing is true; all is permitted" probably won't get much out of "here are all the places ive found shit where neurons should be" so idk

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I, for one, am not in the industry and can’t figure out why people are coming at you with guns blazing. 🙄

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Acting superior presses the dopamine button. Especially since the other poster keeps being mature and kind in their responses, really gets that feedback loop going.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago

it's because he has shit for brains

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (2 children)

@froztbyte @9point6 There's a distinct difference "I have twenty years of experience" and "I've had the same ten minutes of experience over and over again, over a twenty year period" 🤷

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago

yep. on topic of which, this excellent post

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Thank you for saving me the breath to shit on that person's attitude :)

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

yw

these arseslugs are so fucking tedious, and for almost 2 decades they've been dragging everything and everyone around them down to their level instead of finding some spine and getting better

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

word. When I hear someone say "I'm a SW developer and LLM xy helps me in my work" I always have to stop myself from being socially unacceptably open about my thoughts on their skillset.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago

and that’s the pernicious bit: it’s not just their skillset, it also goes right to their fucking respect for their team. “I don’t care about just barfing some shit into the codebase, and I don’t think my team will mind either!”

utter goddamn clownery

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago

It's useful insofar as you can accommodate its fundamental flaw of randomly making stuff the fuck up, say by having a qualified expert constantly combing its output instead of doing original work, and don't mind putting your name on low quality derivative slop in the first place.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (2 children)

That website only works in private mode on Firefox for me, and even then some pages display different things than it is saying it will. It feels like an easter egg almost, does someone have more info about this group?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (2 children)

u wot? works fine in Firefox here. Try this archive or this archive.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago

same here, works fine in Fx (133, aarch64)

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago

I think our comments just crossed each other, read my follow up. I think it was an issue with the site at that specific moment (500 error) instead of the site being quirky

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Privacy Browser with JS off (by default) can read the article and navigate, only minor eye-sore are the buttons at the top of the site which are on a transparent background and stay on top of the text as I scroll down

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

hmm maybe it was just a temporary issue. I was getting a 500 error while still seeing part of the site, and the about page had some pseudocode on it that I thought was intentional, but maybe it was just being a bit buggy because now it seems fine.

The blog post itself is an interesting read bytheway, forgot to mention that in my curiosity for interesting web pages

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›