this post was submitted on 05 Feb 2024
202 points (84.1% liked)
Asklemmy
43945 readers
859 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm not really losing any sleep over this myself. Current approach to machine learning is really no different from a Markov chain. The model doesn't have any understanding in a meaningful sense. It just knows that certain tokens tend to follow certain other tokens, and when you have a really big token space, then it produces impressive looking results.
However, a big part of the job is understanding what the actual business requirements are, translating those to logical steps, and then code. This part of the job can't be replaced until we figure out AGI, and we're nowhere close to doing that right now.
I do think that the nature of work will change, I kind of look at it as sort of doing a pair programming session. You can focus on what the logic is doing, and the model can focus on writing the boilerplate for you.
As this tech matures, I do expect that it will result in less workers being needed to do the same amount of work, and the nature of the job will likely shift towards being closer to a business analyst where the human focuses more on the semantics rather than implementation details.
We might also see new types of languages emerge that leverage the models. For example, I can see a language that allows you to declaratively write a specification for the code, and to encode constraints such as memory usage and runtime complexity. Then the model can bang its head against the spec until it produces code that passes it. If it can run through thousands of solutions in a few minutes, it's still going to be faster than a human coming up with one.