• 1 Post
  • 298 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: March 20th, 2024

help-circle
  • Bc everything I’ve ever read says the opposite: that people spend more time trying to figure out what went wrong when you trusted “AI” (implication: AGI… except we all are aware that these do not exist yet in anything besides the wet dreams of managers) misbehaved, like deleting the entire prod database or escaping from its container and wreaking havock, though performing “well” since for some reason it was trusted to measure its own performance, hence it simply deleted all unit tests and now it gets a perfect score, no flaws, yay!

    Eh, I think the examples you have their are the penultimate examples of bad decisions by bad decision makers.

    LLMs are quite good at verifying requirements of a spec, reviewing budgets to make sure items aren’t missed, etc.

    That said - I agree the writeup is nonsense. LLMs dont understand goals, which is why the person is important. It also makes some common mistakes about middle management, more the caricature of shitty middle management than what good middle management actually is.

    No, I don’t see LLMs replacing anyone in any effective capacity any time soon. If used as an appropriate tool, they can be beneficial. What we have today is NAI (narrow, small scope and good at single purpose tasking) not GAI (general AI, sometimes noted as AGI - human level reasoning). And thats what would be needed to replace a person, but its so far beyond current capabilities its laughable when they pretend its right around the corner.

    For reference, jackasses like Musk and Altman claim it’ll happen within the next year or so. Other dipshit corporate types claim its just 5-10 years away.

    The reality is an LLM will never understand physical or social cause and effect. They still struggle with long context reasoning. This is why you’ll see the dipshits and jackasses try to redefine from general intelligence to something like replacing a desk job without fucking up, because its just marketing crap, shifting goalposts to play pretend that their claims of being geniuses are true.

    They aren’t, LLMs aren’t what will get us to general AI, and if they didnt try and push their hype machine so much we’d probably have better and more focused LLM-based tools.

    Anyway, a super long way of saying I agree its crap, but disagree on why.







  • Start small

    This is my strategy whenever I learn a new language. Start easy, escalate in complexity.

    • print to the command line
    • take input from the command line
    • dumb blackjack game
    • dumb blackjack game and store session results
    • Make a fugly UI but keep the operations text
    • Make a fugly UI and add basic graphics

    Etc.

    The basic game itself doesnt matter - make it hangman if you want. The idea is to get used to a language.

    Keep doing that sort of thing, experimenting and learning, find ways to break things, find weird ways to solve problems, figure out ways to write even less lines of code. Find elements that you can make a function instead. Sanitize inputs excessively. Whatever.

    Play around, and keep playing around. You’ll learn in no time.


    For the record, this is how I learn, by doing. I have a really hard time sticking to tutorials, and I find examples far more helpful than a manual entry explanation of what something does. YMMV.