Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Will AI put programmers our of work?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–117 of 117 posts

Re: Ask HN: Will AI put programmers our of work?

#111

Post by hsn915 »

mjburgess wrote: post #30

Almost all the work of programmers is already automated in the form of everything you get via `pip`, `apt get` etc. A very large part of what remains is the bit which cannot be automated: modelling real world (business) process in terms of the systems of automation which are available. Programming is a modelling activity which is about phrasing sequences of available actions to represent a process. If AI systems gene…

This comment aptly summerizes why I hate most "modern" programming jobs.

This is not programming. This is not what I had in mind when I signed up for Computer Science school.

> modelling real world (business) process in terms of the systems of automation which are available.

In other words, programming by analogy.

Re: Ask HN: Will AI put programmers our of work?

#112

Post by mjburgess »

hsn915 wrote: post #111
mjburgess wrote: post #30

Almost all the work of programmers is already automated in the form of everything you get via `pip`, `apt get` etc. A very large part of what remains is the bit which cannot be automated: modelling real world (business) process in terms of the systems of automation which are available. Programming is a modelling activity which is about phrasing sequences of available actions to represent a process. If AI systems gene…

This comment aptly summerizes why I hate most "modern" programming jobs. This is not programming. This is not what I had in mind when I signed up for Computer Science school. > modelling real world (business) process in terms of the systems of automation which are available. In other words, programming by analogy.

Programming is always a modelling of real-world process. If you want to program directly for the CPU, it is this device which provides you with operation primitives which you sequence. Perhaps you mean you'd prefer to model more interesting processes.

But if you mean algorithm design, that isn't programming. Algorithms arent programs, and the "operations" that they "sequence" are abstract. CSCi alg. design is more like geometry.

Programming is an empirical discipline; it uses the "geometry" of csci to build applications.

Re: Ask HN: Will AI put programmers our of work?

#113

Post by hsn915 »

mjburgess wrote: post #112
hsn915 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment aptly summerizes why I hate most "modern" programming jobs. This is not programming. This is not what I had in mind when I signed up for Computer Science school. > modelling real world (business) process in terms of the systems of automation which are available. In other words, programming by analogy.

Programming is always a modelling of real-world process. If you want to program directly for the CPU, it is this device which provides you with operation primitives which you sequence. Perhaps you mean you'd prefer to model more interesting processes. But if you mean algorithm design, that isn't programming. Algorithms arent programs, and the "operations" that they "sequence" are abstract. CSCi alg. design is more li…

Programming is almost never about modelling a real world process - unless you're doing some kind of physics simulation.

Programming is mainly about data transformations.

Re: Ask HN: Will AI put programmers our of work?

#114

Post by mjburgess »

hsn915 wrote: post #113
mjburgess wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Programming is always a modelling of real-world process. If you want to program directly for the CPU, it is this device which provides you with operation primitives which you sequence. Perhaps you mean you'd prefer to model more interesting processes. But if you mean algorithm design, that isn't programming. Algorithms arent programs, and the "operations" that they "sequence" are abstract. CSCi alg. design is more li…

Programming is almost never about modelling a real world process - unless you're doing some kind of physics simulation. Programming is mainly about data transformations.

All "real world" here means is that the program's semantics are correct given empirical conditions. Here, since "data" just means columns which are measures of the world, the program is modelling a real-world process.

Contrast that with algorithms whose semantics are abstract and are correct given essentially mathematical laws, rather than empirical conditions.

Re: Ask HN: Will AI put programmers our of work?

#115

Post by proton_9 »

tekknik wrote: post #72
p-e-w wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the fact that humans can distinguish a cat from a chair after being shown just a single cat actually demonstrates that humans have much deeper insight into what a "concept" is than current AIs do. If sensor data were the problem, computers could easily outperform humans since we have sensors that generate much more detailed data than the human senses: High-resolution cameras, multi-spectral and thermal imag…

> The actual difference is that when shown a picture and told "this is a cat", humans already know what to look for. Yes exactly. You’ll look for 4 legs, a tail, pointy ears and graceful movement. All of that is data you’ve registered by your (primarily one) senses (sensors). You’re receiving more data, and processing it faster, than a program. Humans are fundamentally pattern matchers, and we’re great at it. What yo…

Have you read Ray Kurzweil's how to create a mind? His definition of our mind is something similar along the lines. Pattern matching/ predictions are all that we do, according to him. I didn't think we'd come so far when I read it a few years ago. Agi seems like a real possibility now and I think I should consider developing some skills besides being able to write php.

Re: Ask HN: Will AI put programmers our of work?

#117

Post by nocman »

p-e-w wrote: post #63
tekknik wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you for the most part, however the fact that humans can determine a cat from a chair by being shown one cat proves that humans receive more data than some AI with sensors. Perhaps I’m misunderstanding your statement.

I believe the fact that humans can distinguish a cat from a chair after being shown just a single cat actually demonstrates that humans have much deeper insight into what a "concept" is than current AIs do. If sensor data were the problem, computers could easily outperform humans since we have sensors that generate much more detailed data than the human senses: High-resolution cameras, multi-spectral and thermal imag…

> If sensor data were the problem, computers could easily outperform humans since we have sensors that generate much more detailed data than the human senses

I believe you vastly underestimate the amount of information the human brain processes continuously. Computers outperform humans by performing extremely narrow, focused computations at a high rate of speed. Despite years and years of research, I don't believe humans have even scratched the surface of understanding the human brain. In fact, I don't believe humans are capable of fully understanding it, since it was created by Someone so much greater than them.

Post reply on HN