My_Name

Video here :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwA3CuJxbk4

"Consumers are increasingly turning to platforms like ChatGPT to research and make decisions because traditional searches have been ruined by advertising, so it’s important that we show up to ruin those moments as well"

Ah yes, the eternal golden triangle

"the sentence...is true but unprovable"

Personally, I would say that if it cannot be shown to be true or false, it cannot be said to be true (or false).

Asking that about that sentence is, to my mind, a category error, like asking what sound yellow makes.

I'm reminded of the episode of Star Trek (TOS) where they make a bunch of robots explode by saying "This sentence is false". Any reasonably written software deals with exceptions very easily.

Indeed. Where do you throw your wooden shoes these days? (Not that it was an effective tactic then anyway)

As I say above, here in the UK we used to have the top rate of tax at 95% of your earnings, and it was the period of fastest growth for poor and middle class people (Boomers at the time)

Unfortunately, the rich are the ones most capable of buying democracy, and the current set of politicians seem to very much welcome the money...

I fully agree. Tax wealth, not work. Then it is far easier to lift yourself from poverty, but harder to hold on to vast amounts of wealth.

After WW2, when tax on the wealthy was far greater, sometimes 95% of their income (in the UK at least), it was the period when the largest number of ordinary people were raised from poverty to middle class status, yet the number of rich people also increased greatly. When that stopped, wages stagnated, and now we have a cost of living crisis. Connect the dots, lol...

Many people think that the market is either 100% free, or 100% controlled, but a free market that operates within defined limits that will stop the greatest excesses of the rich ruining things for everyone else is the sweet spot we should be aiming for.

It was a sensible, valid and pertinent reply to the parent comment though...

As with most comments, context is quite important.

There is a firm opinion in some circles that an AI can never do anything but recombine already known things despite a rising number of cases where that very much appears to be an inaccurate view.

Any slim possibility that vital information was given to the AI to make the task just one of recombination, rather than coming up with anything original, is grabbed with both hands no matter how tenuous.

I can understand why, nobody likes the idea of a machine capable of doing the job of a human, and jobs requiring the mind are especially sacrosanct. But like farm workers in the early part of the C20th, not liking the incoming technology won't change the effect it will have when companies get the idea they can make more money and hire less people.

I may be the only person responding that see the humour in your post.

I thought it was quite funny TBH

Those shows are just shorthand for 'utopian future with no need for money', 'distopian future where corporations have control', 'distopian future where machines have control', 'distopian future where the government have control' etc

Plainly, the precise future we get will be as unlike the films as our current situation is like Metropolis (robot girlfriends, skyscrapers, drones/flying transport) but the specifics are very much different.

We certainly do live in interesting times. Would be nice for them to get a bit less interesting IMO.

I don't like what AI is doing to the world and the tools it puts into the hands of those who would make the world a worse place, but I don't have my head in the sand about the inevitability of what is about to happen in a lot of fields, for better or worse.

Companies will see it as a way to make more for less, they will lay off many people, not realising, as Henry Ford did, that to make money you need to pay your workers, so they can buy products.

What the end state will be is very unclear right now, could be bladerunner, could be star trek, could be 1984. Could be terminator.

We will just have to wait and see.

For font design, and art beyond what could be called boilerplate art, real art, not just something to quickly throw on a website so you have something there, AI is not a good tool.

I think AI will take over many jobs, firstly in the arrangement of characters and words into stock text, or coding. But art, not just pictures, is something that will take longer and may never happen. Design is very similar.

Good art makes you feel something, and you need the human experience to feel that before you can make that and make other people feel that.

There is nothing about a LLM 'sharting out code' that blocks it being reviewed or understood by a human.

You said "they reproduce what they're trained on"

The problem was unsolved, it solved it when it was not possible for it to be trained on the solution, therefore your other claim that "they're always going to produce the most "average" code" does not hold up, they can come up with better code than they were trained on precisely because they can apply known techniques to write better code than existed in their training data. The book you have is out of date and does not apply to recent improvements in the field.

The unit distance problem had no known answer and no roadmap. The model identified the problem, chose its own approach, and produced the proof.

I am not convinced by either your logic or your argument from incredulity. Neither prove your position.

Not sure what you mean, I have one account. Did someone else express this opinion?

I misremembered. I considered both and settled on Forgejo. It was a while ago now and as Forgejo is a Gitea fork my mind must have conflated remaining hook names (hooks/pre-receive.d/gitea, post-receive.d/gitea, update.d/gitea) with Forgejo.

Thank you for the clarification opportunity

I was referring more to the internet having many fathers...

You seem to not know what UBI is. The U stands for Universal, meaning everyone gets the same. Universal Basic Income, a fixed amount of money everyone gets whether they work or not. Nobody gets 'a larger share'

Unlike work, where your wages are theoretically matched to your output, UBI is not.

I think I got all the information I need to be able to judge that article from seeing that the author calls themselves a "Retrofuturist Software Mender".

I agree. Denial only takes you so far. At some point, the devs that insist on outdated working practices (at least ones the boss regards as such) will be replaced by younger people who either don't know about them, or like their boss, don't care.

They will just generate code that passes the tests also written by the AI, ask the AI to find any bugs, and so long as the code runs without obvious issues, that will get released.

There have been a few movies that each revolutionised CGI in their own way. The Last Starfighter, flight of the navigator, tron, jurassic park, toy story, Terminator 2

Until this year, you would have been right, but in May, the Erdős unit-distance conjecture was disproven by an AI. This required novel thought and reasoning, not just recombining already known facts.

The view that they are only statistical prediction machines is becoming increasingly disconnected from their current abilities.

I probably should have put the word 'easily' before readable. After all, if it is valid code, it can be read.

I do find it rather curious that on a site where people value discussion, instead of answering my genuine question, people just downvoted the fact that it was asked in the first place.

How many dependencies do you review the source code of?

Nothing about AI will stop people doing the work that brings them joy, be it stop motion, or hand knitting a jumper from yarn you made yourself from shearing your own sheep.

You just won't be able to get a job doing it. It will be a hobby, not a way to make a living.

I think for some people, it's partly that they think that, unlike physical work, work that involves thinking is somehow special, and humans are the only beings capable of it.

In the 40s, the argument was that computers will never think because they are made of matter, Turing rebutted this by saying that brains are made of matter and introduced The Turing Test, which was then replied to by Searle with his famous 'Chinese Room', which to my mind just made all consciousness suspect, even humans.

At every stage, though, computers have outpaced the predictions for their capabilities, and as you say, the unknown wall that blocks this march is yet to be seen.

With the improvements that AI has made in just the last year, it should be obvious to anyone that code written by an AI will at some point stop being "AI slop" and be better than the majority of coders are able to put out. Reduced to its basics, all code is just characters put into a sequence. Similar to chess or Go, both of which, it was claimed at one point or another, would be impossible for a computer to beat a human, until they did (chess 1997, go 2016), so computers will eventually produce better quality code than even a team of humans is capable of.

A genuine question : If an AI can reliably write code better than most coders, do it quicker, and produce code that runs efficiently which has less, or at least no more, bugs than human written code, why on earth would a company not use an AI to write all their code for most purposes?

And if they did, why is it important for that code to be 'elegant' or even human readable if the bug checking is also done by AI? (as seems to be the direction we are moving in)

You have to wonder about the "Mother of the Internet" at this point...

As a developer who ditched Github and decided to self-host, there is only one reason. It's not technical difficulties, politics, nor AI. It's Microsoft. Like Apple, Facebook etc, I have a deep loathing for Microsoft and I want to remove as much of it from my life as I am able.

I now run Git on a pi using Gitea and Forgejo. I can now upload files of a size unheard of in GitHub, Claude can make a PR by itself that I can diff, edit, then merge, and even with the mighty power of a single pi 3b+, it feels more responsive.