603
Bleeding edge tech
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2023
603 points (96.2% liked)
Programmer Humor
18907 readers
381 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The difference being?
I'm guessing he's saying companies are still using the same human written code, but since AI is sexy right now and is being used to describe even simple programming logic, everything is "powered by AI"
And in 2013 the key word for marketing was algorithm. The YouTube algorithm. The reddit algorithm. Etc.
Automation 😄
Internet-ready
Spray and pray!
That was true like 5 years ago, but now companies are just irresponsibly calling out to LLMs as a function without proper safe guards instead.
Even more likely is that AI’s that write code are trained on human created code. So they aren’t coming up with new, novel ideas to problems in most cases, they are just a far more advanced “copy and paste from StackOverflow”
I feel violated
Hey just remember the classic Quora answer:
https://www.quora.com/Why-should-I-hire-a-software-engineer-if-I-can-just-copy-and-paste-code-from-Stack-Overflow
They are paying $100,000. $1 to copy and paste code from stack overflow, and $99,999 to know where and when to paste the code and how to make it work.
Domain knowledge is real, and AI might level that up, but you’ll be hard pressed to find a junior engineer armed with the same tools as a senior engineer that gets dropped into a gig and can properly utilize AI or even StackOverflow to be on the same playing field. AI can write me a function. But to figure how broken a legacy codebase is and how that function can solve an issue is why engineers are still valuable…for now
I've heard this talk where I work. Senior plebs describing things that are obviously algorithms as AI. And this of course means we had AI before it was cool.
Nothing new here. Buzzwords are the only thing senior managers can understand.
That's exactly the point. It's just how companies market their products nowadays.
I mean, true AI isn't really a thing yet. People have been using AI wrong for a very long time now. Even ChatGPT isn't real AI.
Nobody can seem to consistently define what ai even means
Inevitable. AI is Artificial Intelligence. Nobody can define intelligence, so how can they define an artificial variety?
You can define intellegence by referring to all the very intelligent people online 🧠
Thank you for your service
umm, star trek?
https://youtu.be/ol2WP0hc0NY?t=33
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/ol2WP0hc0NY?t=33
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.
It's a "gaps" problem.
Creationism has the "god of the gaps" where every new fossil forces them to set the goalposts closer together.
The people who think that human intelligence is something special have to adjust the spacing on the goalposts every time a corvid solves a new problem and every time someone figures out how to make a computer do something new.
ChatGPT is built upon a GPT language model, which is a type of Artificial Intelligence.
(This isn't my opinion, just saying what I think they are)
They are saying it's not intelligent in any way though. It sees a bunch of words as numbers and spits out some new numbers that the prediction algorithm creates.
What you're thinking of as AI is actually a narrower version, while true intelligence is termed AGI.
Explanation:
The term 'AI' (Artificial Intelligence) refers to computer systems that can perform tasks that would typically require human intelligence, like recognizing patterns or making decisions. However, most AI systems are specialized and focused on specific tasks.
On the other hand, 'AGI' (Artificial General Intelligence) refers to a higher level of AI that possesses human-like cognitive abilities. AGI systems would be capable of understanding, learning, and applying knowledge across a wide range of tasks, much like us.
So, the distinction lies in the breadth of capabilities: AI refers to more specialized, task-focused systems, while AGI represents a more versatile and human-like intelligence.
That's everything computers do, though, isn't it? Pocket calculators would have fit this definition of AI in the 1970s. In the '60s, "computer" was a human job title.
Unless your pocket calculator can recognise patterns or make decisions, it doesn't fit the description.
Really? I would argue that pocket calculators are AI
Fair enough. What evidence have you got that it's any different than what humans do? Have you looked around? How many people can you point to that are not just regurgitating or iterating or recombining or rearranging or taking the next step?
As far as I can tell, much of what we call intelligent activity can be performed by computer software and the gaps get smaller every year.
That’s not how ChatGPT works.
GPT is an LLM that use RNN. An RNN (Recurrent neural network) is not an algorithm.
It's not artificially intelligent either
Yes, but a neural network is just a collection of ML algorithms.
Yea, but not really. The algorithms are available for free, but they don’t do anything useful by themselves. The RNN is built by training the neural net, which uses grading/classification of training data to increase or decrease millions of coefficients of a multi-layer filter. It’s the training data, the classification feedback and the processing power that actually creates the AI.
the computer wrote the 2nd one on accident when someone asked it to bake a cake.
Bullshit vs Bullshit²