• 0 Posts
  • 64 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 15th, 2023

help-circle


  • MajorHavoc@lemmy.worldtoProgrammer Humor@lemmy.mlwe are safe
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I predict that, within the year, AI will be doing 100% of the development work that isn’t total and utter bullshit pain-in-the-ass complexity, layered on obfuscations, composed of needlessly complex bullshit.

    That’s right, within a year, AI will be doing .001% of programming tasks.







  • Great question. I’m not the one you asked, but I can answer.

    Yes, merge commits, though they get useful work done, cause challenges later. If you’re using GitHub you can actually disable the ‘merge commit’ pattern in the repository settings, under ‘branch protections’, and you’ll have a much nicer time moving code between branches in the future.

    Since you’re working on patterns, if you’re using GitHub, here’s my best tip - it’s related but will also cause some other nice outcomes.

    If you’re using GitHub, to get a much better branching experience, you can turn on branch protections on ‘main’ and specifically turn on ‘require linear history’. This will let GitHub know that you prioritize the quality of the history in ‘main’ over that of all other branches.

    Related: If your team keeps a ‘develop’ branch, you’ll need to get rid of it at the same time as making this change. Using a ‘develop’ branch is not compatible with this setup. Code that used to merge to ‘develop’ should now merge to ‘main’ and git tags should be what indicates code is ready for production.

    With these settings GitHub will nudge your team towards squashing and rebasing when merging, and operations to pull other people’s code into your branch will get dramatically easier. (Edit: You’ll start to see the keyword ‘fast-forward’ a lot more often, which is great.)

    If you’re not using GitHub, you can still look for tools and setups to “require linear history” to get the same benefits.




  • It usually also gets worse while it gets better.

    But I take your point. This stuff will continue to advance.

    But the important argument today isn’t over what it can be, it’s an attempt to clarify for confused people.

    While the current LLMs are an important and exciting step, they’re also largely just a math trick, and they are not a sign that thinking machines are almost here.

    Some people are being fooled into thinking general artificial intelligence has already arrived.

    If we give these unthinking LLMs human rights today, we expand orporate control over us all.

    These LLMs can’t yet take a useful ethical stand, and so we need to not rely on then that way, if we don’t want things to go really badly.


  • “Mastery of language is mastery of human thought.” is easy to prove false.

    The current batch of AIs is an excellent data point. These things are very good at language, and they still can’t even count.

    The average celebrity provides evidence that it is false. People who excel at science often suck at talking, and vice-versa.

    We didn’t talk our way to the moon.

    Even when these LLMs master language, it’s not evidence that they’re doing any actual thinking, yet.


  • Yeah, and highlighting that difference is what is important right now.

    This is the first AI to masquerade as general artificial intelligence and people are getting confused.

    This current thing doesn’t have or need rights or ethics. It can’t produce new intellectual property. It’s not going to save Timmy when he falls into the well. We’re going to need a new Timmy before all this is over