This makes no sense. What in the world makes you think that the average junior dev before AI produced perfectly safe code? For both the junior and the AI, the solution is a senior looking over stuff, decent code review cycles, pair programming, maybe a spec and good documentation for especially heinous customer requirements.
I'd actually go so far as to say SOTA models are far more likely to notice these issues and do them right. Seriously, juniors are often lazy, undisciplined, and very scared of asking for help. I say that as someone that's both been that guy, as well as taught a bunch of those guys.
If there's an olive branch I can extend, it's definitely that adding LLM to a disfunctional, badly managed team and/or process won't improve it. It will just increase the rate of bugs and vulns produced ten fold.
How exactly are you using AI? Are you from 2023? If the AI cannot compile, lint, or type check it's outputs with deterministic tools, you're straight up using it wrong. I have a compiler for a reason, I want the AI to use that, not it's vague memory.
When it comes to missing context, that's (in most cases) on the developer calling it. It cannot have context that you do not give it. If the hyperspecific reason that module A is built weird (some insane legacy customer request maybe) only lives in the minds and hearts of developers having worked on it 3 years ago, that's a failure of documentation, not the AI. A human could not have done better. Obviously, there's limits to everything, but in my personal experience 95% of issues with AI agents would've have likely happened with a freshly onboarded human too.
The definition of vibe coding has shifted a bunch of times. I will agree that any non-developer using it for anything even remotely important/dangerous is asking for trouble. But a developer who knows the possible pitfalls can get pretty freaking far.
For me, the biggest fear is that noones educating/hiring juniors anymore. As a senior, that's job security, but it will still fuck us over once we run out of old people that know what vim is.
Even further, most people raging about supposed pedos give zero actual fucks about children. They just want a group of to hate and despise unthinkingly. They need something to make them feel like better people. It's the reason that despicable murderers will kill child molestors in jail. Neither has a leg to stand on.
For example, how many actual child molesters do you think are pedophiles? The minority!!!! So when you preach about pedos, you're literally ignoring the majority of perpetrators.
Or what about the incessant semantic creep of what a pedophile is? Medically speaking, a capital P Pedophile has a major or exclusive attraction to prepubescent children that is severe enough to hinder them in their daily lifes, or threaten the health of themselves and/or others. The anime nerd in the basement looking at 14 year old eternal dragon girls is weird, but a fucking far cry from a pedo.
If a 30 year old finding a 17 year old attractive and someone actually assaulting a 5 year old is put into the same bucket, the bucket becomes meaningless.
It wasn't actually "bad" research that triggered it. It was the absolute INSANE fact that a single goddamn sentence of Hanks sounded like AI. Of course, Hanks videos trained all these models, so that's not actually surprising to anyone with a brain. Which most fervent AI haters lack.
He made the mistake of treating his audience like grown adults, and explained the situation honestly. He uses AI for some research, but the text in question was written by humans. Now the witch hunt was off to the races. Anything not entirely perfect he had done (like the crocheting thing) was ripe picking to pretend that no single human had ever made a mistake. Surely, it must be the evil AI. Surely, Hank must be lieing.
Ironically, Hank should've lied. He treated an online hate mob like grown adults, which is always a mistake. They never actually reward honesty or accountability or positive change. All they want is outrage and hate.
The sad irony of efforts like that and stuff like Lemmy or Mastadon is that they HAVE to stay just a little too fiddly, too inaccessible, too rough. Otherwise, they become a victim of their own success. Suddenly, "normal" people show up and ruin everything. Scammers follow, bots follow, advertisers follow, etc.
It's like with piracy, where any page that's known to "normal" people is very likely going to be taken down.
Software developers are used to basically making themselves obsolete, just to then be more productive. Inevitably, it always ends with non-developers not actually wanting to understand the new fancy tool, and developers just now using that new tool to be more productive.
I think with software dev, most current devs with some years of experience will end up fine. It's the juniors that are fucked, because AI is genuinely better than them in most ways a suit cares about.
Responsibility comes not from fault, it comes from power to affect change. We do have the power. No individual person has, sure, but we all have a little bit of impact. You people fully understand that concept for racism or sexism, so why are you pretending it's different here?
Instead of looking at who has more power, why are you never asking yourself who has less power? You have the power of entire fucking families in the poorest countries in the world. You know, the people you pretend to care about when we talk about the GLOBAL climate change problem? Weird how the global-ness leaves your body the second we talk about responsibility.....
Seriously, there's a really good chance everyone here it in the global top 10%. And just like the local top 10%, we OVERCONSUME!
You say it's important not to assign blame, yet this entire thread is about blaming companies.
You keep using the word "ethically consume", as if consumption is this magical shield that saves you from all responsibility. If I want to see a woman raped and I rape a woman and tape it, that's obviously horrible. But if I instead find someone to PAY to create the video so I can CONSUME it, that suddenly cancels ANY AND ALL responsibility. WTF?
Calling for people to do what they can, which absolutely includes consuming differently, is the only correct choice here. Stop picking and choosing the parts of activism that require no effort from you personally. Stop pretending like the "system" is some kind of nefarious being in a cave we can just slay. We are all the system, we are all responsible to the degree that we have the power to change.
You might agree a little, but then talk about how little power we have. For one, do you think that's true for feminism, or anti-racism? Me not making sexist jokes has a tiny, tiny impact on patriarchy. Can I then just keep doing that, because it makes no real difference? A bunch of rich patriarchs have so much more power, therefore can I just sit on my lazy ass and never do anything feminist, expect call myself feminist?
Secondly, again, you're picking and choosing what effort is ok to ask for. You ask for political activism, but draw the line at changing your habits where you can. That is simply non-sensical.
Finally, you're just wrong. Global climate change is GLOBAL. You do not get to shirk your duty on the pretense of powerlessness. The average American has the power and influence of ENTIRE FAMILIES in poorer countries. You know, the countries likely most affected?
This is the crowd that preorders a DIGITAL ONLY game that hasn't released a single lick of gameplay video. GTA 6 is proof that capital g Gamers are a lost cause.
The sane people that game have to just stay away from all the ball and gun Gamers, and support the indie scene.
Don't Buddhists use a similar loop hole to eat meat? In theory, they shouldn't be killing and eating animals because of the non-violence. But if they launder it via some other hunter, that's fine.
I mean, it's not like we care about consent when it comes to the animals we eat, or whose secretions we drink. Weird to draw the line at sex/rape, but not at killing/murder.
For how many people do you think animals are the only viable food source? How many in this thread? Like 10%?
Sure hope anyone with options therefore doesn't....
Meh, the cooling effect would take care of things very quickly. Imagine there's a guy popping the tires of all trucks or SUVs in your city. How many would it take for people to start parking somewhere else? Not many.
For now, the parasites still need to live with and besides labrorers and normal people. Immortality can't yet be bought and a cheap knife or gun can create damage no amount of money can fix. That'll change once the autonomous murder robots become self sufficient.
This seems really super straight forward. Demand increases, price increases. Why would you sell your labor for less than the max you can get? If another company offers you twice your salay, are you declining?
This isn't even a capitalist thing. Markets and supply and demand have existed long before capitalism, or socialism.
It's the same reason rents are high in cities. If 100 houses need to be distributed to 1000 families, you need a mechanism to "get rid" of 900. Increasing the price for the rare commodity is one of the options, a lottery like in the DDR is another.
Never ever have I seen it used in that manner. It's always used as a thought terminating cliche suggesting that any comparison requires two things to be equal.
That sounds very much like must online leftists. Every single thing that improves the world slightly is pushed against, simply because it doesn't solve every problem.
Of course, none of these people do anything for the Revolution they love so much. They're evangelical at this point. Where the Revolution is the second coming, requiring no actual work, just believing in it.
Actually, it's an instrument!
This makes no sense. What in the world makes you think that the average junior dev before AI produced perfectly safe code? For both the junior and the AI, the solution is a senior looking over stuff, decent code review cycles, pair programming, maybe a spec and good documentation for especially heinous customer requirements.
I'd actually go so far as to say SOTA models are far more likely to notice these issues and do them right. Seriously, juniors are often lazy, undisciplined, and very scared of asking for help. I say that as someone that's both been that guy, as well as taught a bunch of those guys.
If there's an olive branch I can extend, it's definitely that adding LLM to a disfunctional, badly managed team and/or process won't improve it. It will just increase the rate of bugs and vulns produced ten fold.
How exactly are you using AI? Are you from 2023? If the AI cannot compile, lint, or type check it's outputs with deterministic tools, you're straight up using it wrong. I have a compiler for a reason, I want the AI to use that, not it's vague memory.
When it comes to missing context, that's (in most cases) on the developer calling it. It cannot have context that you do not give it. If the hyperspecific reason that module A is built weird (some insane legacy customer request maybe) only lives in the minds and hearts of developers having worked on it 3 years ago, that's a failure of documentation, not the AI. A human could not have done better. Obviously, there's limits to everything, but in my personal experience 95% of issues with AI agents would've have likely happened with a freshly onboarded human too.
The definition of vibe coding has shifted a bunch of times. I will agree that any non-developer using it for anything even remotely important/dangerous is asking for trouble. But a developer who knows the possible pitfalls can get pretty freaking far.
For me, the biggest fear is that noones educating/hiring juniors anymore. As a senior, that's job security, but it will still fuck us over once we run out of old people that know what vim is.
As always, the main difference between home cooking and restaurant quality is an irresponsible amount of salt, fat, acid, sugar, and/or heat.
Even further, most people raging about supposed pedos give zero actual fucks about children. They just want a group of to hate and despise unthinkingly. They need something to make them feel like better people. It's the reason that despicable murderers will kill child molestors in jail. Neither has a leg to stand on.
For example, how many actual child molesters do you think are pedophiles? The minority!!!! So when you preach about pedos, you're literally ignoring the majority of perpetrators.
Or what about the incessant semantic creep of what a pedophile is? Medically speaking, a capital P Pedophile has a major or exclusive attraction to prepubescent children that is severe enough to hinder them in their daily lifes, or threaten the health of themselves and/or others. The anime nerd in the basement looking at 14 year old eternal dragon girls is weird, but a fucking far cry from a pedo.
If a 30 year old finding a 17 year old attractive and someone actually assaulting a 5 year old is put into the same bucket, the bucket becomes meaningless.
It wasn't actually "bad" research that triggered it. It was the absolute INSANE fact that a single goddamn sentence of Hanks sounded like AI. Of course, Hanks videos trained all these models, so that's not actually surprising to anyone with a brain. Which most fervent AI haters lack.
He made the mistake of treating his audience like grown adults, and explained the situation honestly. He uses AI for some research, but the text in question was written by humans. Now the witch hunt was off to the races. Anything not entirely perfect he had done (like the crocheting thing) was ripe picking to pretend that no single human had ever made a mistake. Surely, it must be the evil AI. Surely, Hank must be lieing.
Ironically, Hank should've lied. He treated an online hate mob like grown adults, which is always a mistake. They never actually reward honesty or accountability or positive change. All they want is outrage and hate.
The sad irony of efforts like that and stuff like Lemmy or Mastadon is that they HAVE to stay just a little too fiddly, too inaccessible, too rough. Otherwise, they become a victim of their own success. Suddenly, "normal" people show up and ruin everything. Scammers follow, bots follow, advertisers follow, etc. It's like with piracy, where any page that's known to "normal" people is very likely going to be taken down.
Software developers are used to basically making themselves obsolete, just to then be more productive. Inevitably, it always ends with non-developers not actually wanting to understand the new fancy tool, and developers just now using that new tool to be more productive.
I think with software dev, most current devs with some years of experience will end up fine. It's the juniors that are fucked, because AI is genuinely better than them in most ways a suit cares about.
Americans simply have no idea how much of what they take for granted is simply an unsustainable luxury. That absolutely includes leftists, too.
Responsibility comes not from fault, it comes from power to affect change. We do have the power. No individual person has, sure, but we all have a little bit of impact. You people fully understand that concept for racism or sexism, so why are you pretending it's different here? Instead of looking at who has more power, why are you never asking yourself who has less power? You have the power of entire fucking families in the poorest countries in the world. You know, the people you pretend to care about when we talk about the GLOBAL climate change problem? Weird how the global-ness leaves your body the second we talk about responsibility.....
Seriously, there's a really good chance everyone here it in the global top 10%. And just like the local top 10%, we OVERCONSUME!
You say it's important not to assign blame, yet this entire thread is about blaming companies. You keep using the word "ethically consume", as if consumption is this magical shield that saves you from all responsibility. If I want to see a woman raped and I rape a woman and tape it, that's obviously horrible. But if I instead find someone to PAY to create the video so I can CONSUME it, that suddenly cancels ANY AND ALL responsibility. WTF?
Calling for people to do what they can, which absolutely includes consuming differently, is the only correct choice here. Stop picking and choosing the parts of activism that require no effort from you personally. Stop pretending like the "system" is some kind of nefarious being in a cave we can just slay. We are all the system, we are all responsible to the degree that we have the power to change.
You might agree a little, but then talk about how little power we have. For one, do you think that's true for feminism, or anti-racism? Me not making sexist jokes has a tiny, tiny impact on patriarchy. Can I then just keep doing that, because it makes no real difference? A bunch of rich patriarchs have so much more power, therefore can I just sit on my lazy ass and never do anything feminist, expect call myself feminist? Secondly, again, you're picking and choosing what effort is ok to ask for. You ask for political activism, but draw the line at changing your habits where you can. That is simply non-sensical. Finally, you're just wrong. Global climate change is GLOBAL. You do not get to shirk your duty on the pretense of powerlessness. The average American has the power and influence of ENTIRE FAMILIES in poorer countries. You know, the countries likely most affected?
This is the crowd that preorders a DIGITAL ONLY game that hasn't released a single lick of gameplay video. GTA 6 is proof that capital g Gamers are a lost cause.
The sane people that game have to just stay away from all the ball and gun Gamers, and support the indie scene.
Monkeys Paw twist: It includes all the animals you've eaten, making the number basically pointless for 99% of people.
Don't Buddhists use a similar loop hole to eat meat? In theory, they shouldn't be killing and eating animals because of the non-violence. But if they launder it via some other hunter, that's fine.
I mean, it's not like we care about consent when it comes to the animals we eat, or whose secretions we drink. Weird to draw the line at sex/rape, but not at killing/murder.
For how many people do you think animals are the only viable food source? How many in this thread? Like 10%? Sure hope anyone with options therefore doesn't....
Meh, the cooling effect would take care of things very quickly. Imagine there's a guy popping the tires of all trucks or SUVs in your city. How many would it take for people to start parking somewhere else? Not many.
For now, the parasites still need to live with and besides labrorers and normal people. Immortality can't yet be bought and a cheap knife or gun can create damage no amount of money can fix. That'll change once the autonomous murder robots become self sufficient.
This seems really super straight forward. Demand increases, price increases. Why would you sell your labor for less than the max you can get? If another company offers you twice your salay, are you declining?
This isn't even a capitalist thing. Markets and supply and demand have existed long before capitalism, or socialism.
It's the same reason rents are high in cities. If 100 houses need to be distributed to 1000 families, you need a mechanism to "get rid" of 900. Increasing the price for the rare commodity is one of the options, a lottery like in the DDR is another.
Never ever have I seen it used in that manner. It's always used as a thought terminating cliche suggesting that any comparison requires two things to be equal.
That sounds very much like must online leftists. Every single thing that improves the world slightly is pushed against, simply because it doesn't solve every problem.
Of course, none of these people do anything for the Revolution they love so much. They're evangelical at this point. Where the Revolution is the second coming, requiring no actual work, just believing in it.