I enjoy music production and systems programming in C
As if wealthy people pay for stuff they could have for free. Literally everybody had their copyright infringed from the training of GenAI. Authors, Journalists, Artists, Musicians, Regisseurs, the list is endless. Unless you sue, you won’t see any compensation from them. By now you should know that companies only play fair if they’re forced to, otherwise literally anything goes.
It’s quite naive to believe they would pay for API access, tbh.
Honestly, I would argue about the complexity of it. The discord API is straightforward, and what you’re describing doesn’t sound that complicated.
And we have seen fairly complex stuff that AI did, but if it does pull it off somehow, the next question is quality.
I just read a bit of AI code a few minutes ago, and it didn’t take long to step over a chain of if / else if statements where only the first if statement if reachable, the rest is not. The code should’ve been one if statement followed by a match statement. Not sure why the LLM thought “combine” two logically completely separate statements into one. And that was in 1.5kloc it generated, so not much. There’s probably even more, I just read a fraction of it.
Honestly, I think what you consider „good code“ is just shifted from what the previous commenter considers „good code“. Prompting is about giving enough information so the AI can solve the task without needing to reconstruct a lot of context. Most people using AI somewhat regularly will have figured out to write good enough prompts. I‘ve never seen AI generate perfectly good code beyond hello world and the fibonacci sequence. And by perfectly good I mean I wouldn’t change beyond 30% of what it produces, which is not a high bar.
You could’ve literally learned programming…
.cc and .hh feels the most serious.
Yeah, if you can write modern C++, than Rust is going to feel much more natural and easy.
By definition, that in itself isn’t gatekeeping. And I personally wouldn’t feel gatekept, just excluded. In the article the author evaluates the usefulness of AI for a field which they admit to have no clue about. And it reads like that AI gives you the knowledge of that field, just 3 seconds away, and everyone is obsolete now, which isn’t true. While it can give you the knowledge, you still need the understanding, and understanding is what makes people good at something, not knowledge in itself. I don’t understand your argument. The situation you described is not what I‘ve been talking about.
You have it plain sight. Refusing to engage with someone is not gatekeeping. Your definition pretty much aligns with what I said.
And if someone doesn’t have any idea what they’re talking about, then maybe they shouldn’t take part in the talking. You can’t tell me that you‘ll take cybersecurity advice from someone who saw a movie about hacking.
Which doesn’t mean that clueless people have nothing of value to add, but it’s unlikely (especially in highly factual discussions).
No one can tell whether AGI in the form of something akin to biological brains will happen. How will we build something we can’t comprehend the architecture of?
Also, I think their point was not that AGI will never happen, it’s more that it doesn’t matter whether it happens or not, because AI/AGI will not solve our problems (well, it will solve some, but create so many more that in the end we’ve really achieved nothing).
I think we are further from AGI than people think. I doubt I will live to see it.
That’s not gatekeeping, but okay. Gatekeeping is about withholding knowledge & information from a group of people for a personal benefit. It’s not gatekeeping to stop every clueless idiot from blurting out their opinion and expecting everyone to respect it, because otherwise you’re a gatekeeper (I don’t want to imply the author of the article is a clueless idiot, this is a generalized statement).
That’s one of the dumbest articles I‘ve ever read. Glad the author realized it themselves.
If you ask me personally, I don’t think that any of this has a benefit for anyone. I don’t think this is an advancement. It doesn’t make us work less, it just makes us achieve more in the same amount of time, or at least most people feel that way. It doesn’t make me more productive, it’s rather the opposite.
And what good is it to us if we achieve more? The only benefit it has is for those god damned capitalists. Great for them. The pay we get stays the same, and it probably even gets less.
OpenClaw? Why the fuck would I let an AI use my computer? I want to use my computer. I want to read my emails and I want to answer them. I want to research stuff and I want to learn. Why would I let an AI do all of those things? Hire a human because AI can’t touch grass? Seriously?
It‘s all just so gimmicky, and yes it’s interesting and amazing that those things are possible, but it’s like flying humans to mars, it is really cool? Yeah. Will it have any real benefit? No.
To me, this is all just fucking sad and will probably mark the advancement from late capitalism stage into hopefully complete economic chaos.
So yeah, when it comes to AI, I‘m probably not the best one to ask.
But what they’re also implying is is that most people just can’t keep up. But they can, apparently.
About the security stuff, I don’t think it is a question of whether AI could do it or couldn’t do it, it just wasn’t extensively used for it. For a long time there have been LLM bots trying to automatically identify security vulnerabilities in hopes of making “free money”, but it wasn’t effective. Now there’s people actually trying to find real issues. And I would argue that AI is not good at it. You can just let it ponder for as long as you can feed it with money, and you will definitely find vulnerabilities. The false-positive rate is very likely high. If I try to roll a dice 12 times, and 3 out of those were 6, then that doesn’t make me a good dice roller.
I think it’s just more the act of discovering what we can do with AI. It’s like openclaw, that could’ve been around last year, it’s not like AI wasn’t capable enough at that point, it’s just that no-one thought of using it like that (or at least no-one built it to the extent of openclaw and got it that popular).
Not even every bug AI finds is a bug.
But then you’re primarily extracting text, which you don’t need LLMs for. OCR tools will do the job much cheaper and more effective.
That problem isn’t even specific to computer science, it’s specific to most engineering fields. Programmers are just extremely good at automating, so they automate themselves out of existence.
At least in Germany, people with higher-education on-average also have more political awareness - but the more engineering their field contains, the more that awareness jumps out of the window (what I mean by that is that of all the people with higher-education, engineers have the highest rate of politically right-leaning people, which in my world-view equates to being incompetent).
Which imo comes from another problem: Computer Science had a huge boom, and now we ended up with a lot of businessmen who can hussle 70h/week to get their degree in 4 semesters, so that they can start their path to their first million. Basically, computer science got invaded by capitalists and the nerds just went to another corner in hopes not to be bothered. Not that they could have done much about it, there are way more capitalists than there are computer nerds.
Try to optimize this away, sucker:
echo "level full-speed" | sudo tee /proc/acpi/ibm/fan
Luckily I have a ThinkPad, I just run the following program and hold the fan vents against my face:
int main(void) {
while (1);
}
GNU is a trusted quality stamp. Me see GNU, me go GET.
Climate change will make winters more extreme as well, at least for now.