• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    You mean OpenAI didn’t just create a superintelligent artificial brain that will surpass all human ability and knowledge and make our species obsolete?

    • kescusay@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The funny thing is, last year when ChatGPT was released, people freaked out about the same thing.

      Some of it was downright gleeful. Buncha people told me my job (I’m a software developer) was on the chopping block, because ChatGPT could do it all.

      Turns out, not so much.

      I swear, I think some people really want to see software developers lose their jobs, because they hate what they don’t understand, and they don’t understand what we do.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Even if ChatGPT gets far in advance of the way it is now in terms of writing code, at the very least you’re still going to need people to go over the code as a redundancy. Who is going to trust an AI so much that they will be willing to risk it making coding errors? I think that the job of at the very least understanding how code works will be safe for a very long time, and I don’t think ChatGPT will get that advanced for a very long time either, if ever.

        • kescusay@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          There’s more to it than that, even. It takes a developer’s level of knowledge to even begin to tell ChatGPT to make something sensible.

          Sit an MBA down in front of a ChatGPT window and tell them to make an application. The application has to save state, it has to use the company’s OAuth login system, it has to store data in a PostgreSQL database, and it has to have granular, roles-based access control.

          Then watch the MBA struggle because they don’t understand that…

          • Saving state is going to vary depending on the front-end. Are we writing a browser application, a desktop application, or a mobile application? The MBA doesn’t know and doesn’t understand what to ask ChatGPT to do.
          • OAuth is a service running separately to the application, and requires integration steps that the MBA doesn’t know how to do, or ask ChatGPT to do. Even if they figure out what OAuth is, ChatGPT isn’t trained on their particular corporate flavor for integration.
          • They’re actually writing two different applications, a front-end and a back-end. The back-end is going to handle communication with PostgreSQL services. The MBA has no idea what any of that means, let alone know how to ask ChatGPT to produce the right code for separate front-end and back-end features.
          • RBAC is also probably a separate service, requiring separate integration steps. Neither the MBA nor ChatGPT will have any idea what those integration steps are.

          The level of knowledge and detail required to make ChatGPT produce something useful on a large scale is beyond an MBA’s skillset. They literally don’t know what they don’t know.

          I use an LLM in my job now, and it’s helpful. I can tell it to produce snippets of code for a specific purpose that I know how to describe accurately, and it’ll do it. Saves me time having to do it manually.

          But if my company ever decided it didn’t need developers anymore because ChatGPT can do it all, it would collapse inside six months, and everything would be broken due to bad pull requests from non-developers who don’t know how badly they’re fucking up. They’d have to rehire me… And I’d be asking for a lot more money to clean up after the poor MBA who’d been stuck trying to do my job.

      • enkers@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        As a software developer, I do want to see software developers lose their jobs to AI. This shouldn’t be surprising, as the purpose of a lot of software development is to put other people out of a job via automation, and that’s fundamentally a good thing. The alternative is like wanting a return to preindustrial society. Automation generally raises quality of life.

        The real problem is that we still haven’t figured out how to distribute the benefits of society’s automation efforts equitably so that they raise quality of life for everyone.

        • nicetriangle@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah that would be all fine and well if it meant we’re on track for some post-work egalitarian utopia but you and I know that’s not at all where this is heading.

          • FaceDeer@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Unfortunately based on what I know of history it seems likely that humanity won’t ever be on track to build a post-work egalitarian utopia until we’ve got no other option left. So I support going ahead with this tech because that seems like a good way to force the issue. The transition period will be rough, but better than stagnation IMO.

          • enkers@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Oh, for sure, it’ll definitely further wealth disparity, as automation always seems to in a capitalist system. But that’s a societal problem that we continually have to address, and it spans nearly all fields of human work to varying degrees.

            Fortunately, for the most part tech advancements are very hard to control. Progress can be impeded from spreading, but not stopped, and it means the average individual has access to more and more powerful tools.