I don't need GPT-4 to write code, I can do that myself.
I want it to attend all the meetings for me with endless managers discussing what the code does, should do, could do, customer would like it to do, can't be done and so on.
Hint to managers: Programming doesn't take up my time. Your endless meetings to discuss my programming takes up all the time...
I think the fear should be less about AI taking 100% of jobs but it should be AI making a single programmer do the job of 5, which would wipe a majority of the market out and make it a non-viable career option for most. Companies are already bloated, imagine when they realize one overworked highly paid senior can replace 10 juniors.
If increased productivity equaled job loss, there would be two programmers alive today, doing the same job as the fewer than 10000 programmers using punch cards as we entered the year 1950. A lot of projects today are not even greenlit because they would be too expensive to make. For instance, there are a lot processes in almost every country that require you to file paper forms, even though we have had web forms and…
Something like 97% of all jobs have been eliminated since the Industrial Revolution started ~250 years ago.
And instead of the 97% unemployment our intuition tell us would happen, we're instead 30x as productive.
The same will happen when/if AI makes writing software far more effective.
I want to see GPT-4 dealing with this situation: - they: we need a new basic POST endpoint - us: cool, what does the api contract look like? URL? Query params? Payload? Response? Status code? - they: Not sure. Third-party company XXQ will let you know the details. They will be the ones calling this new endpoint. But in essence it should be very simple: just grab whatever they pass and save it in our db - us: ok, cool…
> Basically, 99% of the effort is NOT WRITING CODE. It's all about communication with people, and problem solving. If we use GPT-X in our company, it will help us with 1% of our workload First, if you did have GPT-X (say GPT-10) in your company, there wouldn't be much back-and-forth communication either. Those parts would still be handled with GPT-X talking to another GPT-X in the other company. Even the requirements…
The problem is that a GPT capable of doing all those things at the level required is also capable of running the company. Someone with capitol can start the business and set GPT-X to go out and maximize paperclip profits.
I want to see GPT-4 dealing with this situation: - they: we need a new basic POST endpoint - us: cool, what does the api contract look like? URL? Query params? Payload? Response? Status code? - they: Not sure. Third-party company XXQ will let you know the details. They will be the ones calling this new endpoint. But in essence it should be very simple: just grab whatever they pass and save it in our db - us: ok, cool…
sorry, is the debate here whether gpt can engage in a conversation with someone and respond using previous context? why would any of this present a challenge given its known abilities?
GPT-4 can write code, but it can't build software.
Well...it could build software if humans gave it the right prompts. Coming up with the right prompts is difficult, because it means you're asking all the right questions.
If you're just really good at writing code, then yes, GPT is coming for your job. Do what humans are good at: responding to the needs of other human beings and building solutions around them.
Wouldn’t this actually create more demand for programmers? More businesses can exist that have a need for software. To date every advance in programming efficiency has resulted in more tech, not less. Additionally there’s the math behind it. If Company A fires 50% of their staff because AI lets the remaining 50% work at twice the productivity then how will they compete with Company B that keeps their staff and now ge…
Yep, I personally see the cost of doing a start-up going way down for individual developers or even junior developers.
This is the ray of sunshine in all this AI stuff, to me.
This is so common in many types of business, and usually a very difficult point to articulate so thank you for that. It's something to be shown to those ringing the death-knell for programmers, artists, and the like. Those death-knell types seemingly aren't aware of what day to day operations looks like and how AI makes a great tool, but doesn't necessarily deal with the very human factors of whims, uncertainty, reac…
I think the fear should be less about AI taking 100% of jobs but it should be AI making a single programmer do the job of 5, which would wipe a majority of the market out and make it a non-viable career option for most. Companies are already bloated, imagine when they realize one overworked highly paid senior can replace 10 juniors.
I think this fear is unfounded because history shows this is not the case. We will adapt to the new level of productivity and our goals will adapt accordingly. What we are expected to produce will adapt. You were able to pump out 4 solid production grade pull requests per sprint? Then the expectation increases to a single dev being able to pump out 10. The company's ambition will grow as a result of the newfound efficiencies, and management will continue to request things that cannot be reasonably delivered on time with the people and tooling we have.
I want to see GPT-4 dealing with this situation: - they: we need a new basic POST endpoint - us: cool, what does the api contract look like? URL? Query params? Payload? Response? Status code? - they: Not sure. Third-party company XXQ will let you know the details. They will be the ones calling this new endpoint. But in essence it should be very simple: just grab whatever they pass and save it in our db - us: ok, cool…
I agree, but I would put it like this: 99% of a software developer's job isn't writing code, it's getting consensus across stakeholders what the "prompt" for the coding task should be, how that prompt should change over time, which parts of the problem should be included in this week's prompt and which one's should be tackled next week, etc. Also, more often than not, the task isn't exactly about generating code, it's about sending data between various clients and servers, tweaking code where necessary for compatibility and new data shapes.
In before all the comments about how “most code is trivial” or “most programming is stuff that already exists” or “you’re missing the point look how it’s getting better”. I really am in awe of how much work people seem willing to do to justify this as revolutionary and programmers as infantile, and also why they do that. It’s fascinating. Thinking back to my first job out of college as a solid entry level programmer.…
> I really am in awe of how much work people seem willing to do to justify this as revolutionary and programmers as infantile, and also why they do that. It’s fascinating. Equally fascinating is all of the "this is fine" posts from programmers suddenly realizing they are not the gods they once thought. But fret not, programming is not the first industry that has been automated into a shell of itself. Yes, the industr…
"Yes, the industry is going to shrink massively"
You meant "expand massively" i think. Did all the programmers manually making machine code get fired and the job of programmer disappear when compilers were invented and totally replaced these jobs? No, it just changed to use the new tool.
There wont be any unprecedented mass layoffs, despite what the jaded STEM-hating twitter crowd wants. Companies will simply make their programmers use these tools to increase the amount of produce per employee, and make software that would have been otherwise financially impossible to be made. Because the competition will do so too to get ahead.