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

Google testing ChatGPT-like chatbot 'Apprentice Bard' with employees

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 348 posts

Re: Google testing ChatGPT-like chatbot 'Apprentice Bard' with employees

#51

Post by croes »

ipnon wrote: post #20
22SAS wrote: post #5

So, a LLM, trained extensively on StackOverflow and other data (possibly the plethora of LC solutions out there), is fed a bunch of LC questions and spits out the correct solutions? In other news, water is blue. It is one thing to train an AI on megatons of data, for questions which have solutions. The day ChatGPT can build a highly scalable system from scratch, or an ultra-low latency trading system that beats the c…

Until ChatGPT can slack my PM, attend my sprint plannings, read my Jira tickets, and synthesize all of this into actionable tasks on my codebase, I think we have job security. To be clear, we are starting to see this capability on the horizon.

Not quite. You have job security as long as companies don't belief ChatGPT can do all that

Re: Google testing ChatGPT-like chatbot 'Apprentice Bard' with employees

#52

Post by ghaff »

mobilefriendly wrote: post #22
fdgsdfogijq wrote: post #3

Will humanity finally be liberated from memorization? Forcing school children to memorize and then regurgitate facts is barbaric, and so is using it as a measure in hiring.

Clearly you didn't learn the meaning of "barbaric". Memorization and mastery of vocabulary and multiplication factors are a base towards more advanced learning.

One can simultaneously agree that there's probably too much rote memorization in school while also thinking that some basic level of math skills including simple multiplication without a calculator, vocabulary, certain historical/scientific/civics/etc. facts, ability to at least print, etc. are important.

Re: Google testing ChatGPT-like chatbot 'Apprentice Bard' with employees

#53

Post by emuneee »

jeffbee wrote: post #7

That's odd because when I gave ChatGPT my icebreaker interview question that I used a lot at Google it fell right on its face. And this is a question I expect teenagers to ace in one minute.

I saw this article and fed ChatGPT a bunch of questions I've seen before in my coding interviews. It nailed most of the algorithms, however, it failed completely giving me test cases it would run to test the function it just regurgitated. ie...it gave me an input then mostly incorrect/invalid expected outputs.

Re: Google testing ChatGPT-like chatbot 'Apprentice Bard' with employees

#54

Post by startupsfail »

ipnon wrote: post #20
22SAS wrote: post #5

So, a LLM, trained extensively on StackOverflow and other data (possibly the plethora of LC solutions out there), is fed a bunch of LC questions and spits out the correct solutions? In other news, water is blue. It is one thing to train an AI on megatons of data, for questions which have solutions. The day ChatGPT can build a highly scalable system from scratch, or an ultra-low latency trading system that beats the c…

Until ChatGPT can slack my PM, attend my sprint plannings, read my Jira tickets, and synthesize all of this into actionable tasks on my codebase, I think we have job security. To be clear, we are starting to see this capability on the horizon.

The capability will be available in around two weeks once RLHF alignment with the software engineering tasks is completed. The deployment will take take around twelve hours, most of it taken by human review of you and your manager of the integration summary pages. You can keep your job, supervise and review how your role is being played for the following 6 months, until the human supervision role is deemed unnecessary.

Re: Google testing ChatGPT-like chatbot 'Apprentice Bard' with employees

#55

Post by squarefoot »

22SAS wrote: post #5

So, a LLM, trained extensively on StackOverflow and other data (possibly the plethora of LC solutions out there), is fed a bunch of LC questions and spits out the correct solutions? In other news, water is blue. It is one thing to train an AI on megatons of data, for questions which have solutions. The day ChatGPT can build a highly scalable system from scratch, or an ultra-low latency trading system that beats the c…

To me the real advancement isn't the amount of data it can be trained with, but the way it can correlate them and choose from, according to the questions it's being asked. The first is culture, the second intelligence, or a good approximation of it. Which doesn't mean it could perform the job; that probably means the tests are flawed.

Re: Google testing ChatGPT-like chatbot 'Apprentice Bard' with employees

#56

Post by jefftk »

lechacker wrote: post #47
22SAS wrote: post #5

So, a LLM, trained extensively on StackOverflow and other data (possibly the plethora of LC solutions out there), is fed a bunch of LC questions and spits out the correct solutions? In other news, water is blue. It is one thing to train an AI on megatons of data, for questions which have solutions. The day ChatGPT can build a highly scalable system from scratch, or an ultra-low latency trading system that beats the c…

Water isn't blue, it's transparent

Water is blue, just like air is blue, just like blue-tinted glasses are blue. They disproportionately absorb non-blue frequencies, which is what we mean when we call something "blue".

Re: Google testing ChatGPT-like chatbot 'Apprentice Bard' with employees

#58

Post by brhsagain »

SpeedilyDamage wrote: post #38
mensetmanusman wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t understand this take. If it was easy to make an LLM that quickly parsed all of StackOverflow and described new answers that most of the time worked in the timeframe of an interview, it would have been done by now. ChatGPT is clearly disruptive being the first useful chatbot in forever.

You don't understand the take that just because ChatGPT can pass a coding interview doesn't mean the coding interview is useless or that ChatGPT could actually do the job? What part of that take do you not understand? It's a really easy concept to grasp, and even if you don't agree with it, I would expect at least that a research scientist (according to your bio) would be able to grok the concepts almost immediately.…

> doesn't mean the coding interview is useless or that ChatGPT could actually do the job

Aren't these kind of mutually exclusive, at least directionally? If the interview is meaningful you'd expect it to predict job performance. If it can't predict job performance then it is kind of useless.

I guess you could play some word games here to occupy a middle ground ("the coding interview is kind of useful, it measures something, just not job performance exactly") but I can't think of a formulation where this doesn't sound pretty silly.

Re: Google testing ChatGPT-like chatbot 'Apprentice Bard' with employees

#59

Post by klyrs »

alephnerd wrote: post #46
klyrs wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your PM should be the first to be worried, honestly. I keep hearing people describing their job as "I just click around on Jira while I sit through meetings all day."

That's a bad PM then to be honest. I think ChatGPT will definetly commodify a lot of "bitch work" (pardon my french). The PMs who are only writing tickets and not participating in actively building ACs or communicating cross functionally are screwed. But so are SWEs who are doing the bare minimum of work. The kinds of SWEs and PMs who concentrate on stuff higher in the value chain (like system design, product market…

To be fair to the people that I hear that from, they're essentially complaining about the worst part of their job. They're active participants in those meetings, they are genuinely thinking about the complexities of the mismatch between what management asks for and what their ICs can do, etc. I see their value. But the awful truth is that a $10k/project/yr license for PMaaS software will be very appealing to executives.

Re: Google testing ChatGPT-like chatbot 'Apprentice Bard' with employees

#60

Post by ALittleLight »

tukantje wrote: post #40
ALittleLight wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is a huge demonstration of progress. Shrugging it off as "water is blue" ignores the fact that a year ago this wouldn't have been possible. At one end of the "programmer" scale is hacking basic programs together by copying off of stack overflow and similar - call that 0. At the other end is the senior/principal software architect - designing scalable systems to address business needs, documenting the com…

We don’t get junior engineers for solving problems we tend to get them because they grow into other roles.

First, that's not true. You need people to actually write code. If your organization is composed of seniors who are doing architecture planning, cross-team collaboration, etc - you will accomplish approximately nothing. A productive team needs both high level planning and strategy and low level implementation.

Second, the LLM engineer will be able to grow into other roles too. Maybe all of them.

Post reply on HN