this post was submitted on 22 May 2025
737 points (95.6% liked)
Programmer Humor
25159 readers
1345 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Even if you're the one that built, programmed, and trained the AI when nothing else like it existed?
So? Some of the people pushing out ai slop would be perfectly capable of writing their own llm out of widely available free tools. Contrary to popular belief, they are not complex pieces of software, just extremely data hungry. Does not mean they magically understand the code output by the llm when it spits out something.
Stark would have developed their own way of training their AI. It wouldn't be an LLM in the first place.
and he stil wouldn't understand its output. Because as we clearly see, he doesn't even try to look at it.
What if it were just a really big Expert system?
That's usually the thing that you call AI players or COM players in computer games.
given that expert systems are pretty much just a big ball of if-then statements, then he might be considered to have written the app. Just with way more extra steps.
so? someone invented current llms too. Nothing like them existed before either. If they vibe coded with them they'd still be producing slop.
Coding an llm is very very easy. What's not easy is having all the data, hardware and cash to train it.
Yeah but the people who made it like that probably understand whether to trust it to write code or not. The AI Tony wrote, he knows what it does best and he trusts it to write his code. Just because it's AI doesn't mean it's LLM. Like I trust the errors compilers give me even if I didn't write them because it's good. And I trust my scripts to do things that I wrote them for, specifically since I tested them. Same with the AI you yourself made, you'd test it, and you'd know the design principles.
an ai is not a script. You can know what a script does. neural networks don't work that way. You train them, and hope you picked the right dataset for it to hopefully learn what you want it to learn. You can't test it. You can know that it works sometimes but you also know that it will also not work sometimes and there'sjacksjit you can do about it. A couple of gigabytes of floating point numbers is not decipherable to anyone.
And who says AI means neural network? That's what we use, doesn't mean that's the only AI possible to write. There are a lot of different models, neural network is popular right now because it can learn from data without anyone having to teach it actual logic. An AI written by fictional character can be a deterministic kind with very similar logic to humans that you can inspect and write and give weights to things.