And before stack overflow, we used books. Did we need it? No. But stack overflow was an improvement so we moved to that.
In many ways, ai is an improvement on stack overflow. I feel bad for people who refuse to see it, because they’re missing out on a useful and powerful tool.
Which is, of course, true for every source of information that can point you in a direction.
I’m a senior dev, and copilot as a productivity tool usually pays for the monthly license multiple times per week.
Whenever I hear someone say it’s useless, that tells me they are either some godlike dev who knows everything already (lol), they haven’t actually used it, they are not good at integrating new tools into their workflow, or they simply haven’t learned how to use it yet.
One time when we were tripping on acid, one guy found a blade a grass that he claimed was changing colors. A bunch of the other guys gathered around and they were all laying there in a circle on their stomachs looking at it, trying to figure out if it was actually changing colors or if they were just tripping.
They were being ridiculous so I was just laying there staring at the clouds laughing while listening to them debating it.
The best part was that after about 10 minutes, they concluded that it must actually be changing colors.
I didn’t say they were the same thing; my whole point is that they are different. We’re talking about people thinking they’re talking to a human, compared to people attributing a single human attribute to a spoon. But probably not even really for the latter because if you ask someone if the spoon is actually sad, most everyone will say no.
You ask someone if the ugly spoon is human, they know it’s not.
We asked people if they were talking to a human, and it said yes.
These are not the same.
I see it as the opposite, and now that it’s getting uncomfortably close to seeming human, that makes people uncomfortable and so we are rejecting the turing test in favor of… what? It seems like nothing. It’s convenient that what makes us human is intangible.
legal verbiage is such a pointless waste and almost unnecessary
Wow. I like the rest of your position, but being precise in language, and understanding what things mean legally is extremely important.
If having no clue what most people need is the metric, were eliminating pretty much everyone from consideration.
And how is it even “applied”? I can’t come up with an explanation based on my understanding of term, which is to use the knowledge of something to solve real world problems.
Imagine thinking people view you as a hipster for using Linux.
The other poster is either speaking from a place of ignorance, as they’ve never really used it, of they just aren’t smart enough to learn how to use a new tool.
As much as middle management sucks, devs blaming management for their own inability to learn is almost on the same level.
I was lucky enough to get in on my company’s beta test for copilot.
When I hear people say it’s bad, all that tells me is that they are either completely ignorant and have never really used it, or they aren’t good at learning how to use new tools.
I’ve worked in a few places, all with senior engineers, including myself as a senior engineer, all of which the senior engineers spent most of their time actually engineering. If I went somewhere as a senior and was told I was going to be in meetings all day, I would quit because that’s management, not engineering.
We do standups twice a week. At worst they run a half hour for my team of about 10 people. Usually we’re done in 15-20 minutes. Please tell me it’s just an absolutely made up joke that you have an hour and 15 minutes of stand up meetings every day. I would shoot myself.
Throughout the 1800s, the us saw increasingly more severe and more frequent economic boom and bust cycles. This helps the wealthy as they are the ones who can buy up all the assets during the busts, and the common man gets fucked. This all culminated with the great depression. Its something like 20 recessions of 15% or more retractions between and 1930.
When the fed was given teeth to actually control the fractional reserve system., we’ve seen constant inflation, but the number and severity of economic recessions has gone way down.
We’ve seen 1 retraction over 15% since 1940. And that was because of COVID lockdowns.
This small, controlled inflation is great for the regular joe because it creates stability. And it was all going well until deregulation during the 80s.
you don’t catch it
That’s on you then. Copilot even very explicitly notes that the ai can be wrong, right in the chat. If you just blindly accept anything not confirmed by you, it’s not the tool’s fault.
I’m a developer with about 15 years of experience. I got into my company’s copilot beta program.
Now maybe you are some magical programmer that knows everything and doesn’t need stack overflow, but for me it’s all but completely replaced it. Instead of hunting around for a general answer and then applying it to my code, I can ask very explicitly how to do that one thing in my code, and it will auto generate some code that is usually like 90% correct.
Same thing when I’m adding a class that follows a typical pattern elsewhere in my code…well it will auto generate the entire class, again with like 90% of it being correct. (What I don’t understand is how often it makes up enum values, when it clearly has some context about the rest of my code) I’m often shocked as to how well it knew what I was about to do.
I have an exception thats not quite clear to me? Well just paste it into the copilot chat and it gives a very good plain English explanation of what happened and generally a decent idea of where to look.
And this is a technology in it’s infancy. It’s only been released for a little over a year, and it has definitely improved my productivity. Based on how I’ve found it useful, it will be especially good for junior devs.
I know it’s in, especially on lemmy, to shit on AI, but I would highly recommend any dev get comfortable with it because it is going to change how things are done and it’s, even in its current form, a pretty useful tool.
My 100 year old house has marks on the floor that look like it was worn from a door swinging. Very distinctive arc pattern. Like it was there for many years and was under frequent use.
The problem is that there’s no door there, just a wall, which is also the edge of a dormer…so if there were a door there it would just open out onto a sloping roof.
Every time I register it I contemplate why it’s there and wtf happened.
A crowd of 10,000 people means fuck all compared to 158,429,631.
I agree that it would be a bad data set, but not because it is too small. That size would actually give you a pretty good result if it was sufficiently random. Which is, of course, the problem.
But you’re missing the point: just because something is obvious to you does not mean it’s actually true. The model could be trained in a way to not be biased by our number choice, but to actually be pseudo-random. Is it surprising that it would turn out this way? No. But to think your assumption doesn’t need to be proven, in such a case, is almost equivalent to thinking a Trump rally is a good data sample for determining the opinion of the general public.
Everyone has lots of bugs in their code, especially beginners. This is why we have testing and qa and processes to minimize the risk of bugs. As the saying goes, “the good news about computers is that they do what you tell them to do. The bad n was is that they do what you tell them to do.”
Programming is an iterative process where you do something, it doesn’t work, and then you give it another go. It’s not something that senior devs get right on the first try, while beginners have to try many times. It’s just that senior devs have seen a lot more so have a better understanding of why it probably went wrong, and maybe can avoid some more common pitfalls the first time around. But if you are writing bug free code in your first pass, well you’re a way better programmer than anyone I’ve met.
Ai is just another tool to make this happen. Sure, it’s not always the tool for the job, just like IoC is not always the right tool for the job. But it’s nice to have it and sometimes it makes things much easier.
Like just now I was debugging a large SQL query. I popped it into copilot, asked if to break it into parts so I could debug. It gave a series of smaller queries that I then used to find the point where it fell apart. This is something that would have taken me at least a half hour of tedious boring work, fixed in 5 minutes.
Also for writing scripts. I want some data formatted so it was easier to read? No problem, it will spit out a script that gets me 90% of the way there in seconds. Do I have to refine it? Absolutely. But if I wrote it myself, not being super prolific with python, it would have taken me a half hour to get the structure in place, and then I still would have had to refine it because I don’t produce perfect code the first time around. And it comments the scripts, which I rarely do.
What also amazes me is that sometimes it will spit out code and I’ll be like “woah I didn’t even know you could do that” and so I learned a new technique. It has a very deep “understanding” of the syntax and fundamentals of the language.
Again, I find it shocking that experienced devs don’t find it useful. Not living up to the hype I get. But not seeing it as a productivity boosting tool is a real head scratcher to me. Granted, I’m no rockstar dev, and maybe you are, but I’ve seen a lot of shit in my day and understand that I’m legitimately a senior dev.