this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
226 points (96.3% liked)
Technology
59440 readers
5230 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I prompted ChatGPT to write and adjust a linear Python script for a repetitive task I needed to automate. It took 30 minutes versus the 6-12 hours I would have consumed if I had coded it myself.
It’s a huge force multiplier when used properly.
It can speed up the process, but it’s not like it would replace a programmer. It still requires someone with enough knowledge to check it’s output and correct it’s mistakes or call it’s bullshit.
It won't replace us yet. This is the first technology over my entire career that has me a little concerned about the future.
I don’t know. The speed that these things blew up in becoming The Next Big Thing™️ kind of sets off my bullshit detectors.
I’m certainly not an expert in machine learning topics, but I suspect that the output of LLMs will never be able to output complex code that doesn’t require a lot of modification and verification.
While it may not eliminate positions entirely, it will greatly reduce the number of positions needed.
See any advancements in automation from farming to manufacturing.
See, this is the kind of thing that makes my bullshit detectors go off. The comparison elevates this new tech to the same level of importance as past revolutionary shifts in industry. But this only seems justified if you can assume the rapid advancements in LLMs will continue at the same rate going forward, which not a given at all. Fundamentally, these models are trained to produce convincing output, not accurate output. There is no guarantee that high accuracy will be achieved with this approach.
For programming, I don’t see these LLMs any differently than previous advancements in tooling and in high level programming languages and frameworks. They will make it easier to rapidly prototype and deploy (shoddy) apps, but they will not be replacing devs who work at a low level high performance, or critical areas, nor will they be drastically reducing the workforce needed - at least not any more than other tooling advancements.
All just my opinion, of course. We shall see.