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

Devin: AI Software Engineer

cognition-labs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 604 posts

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#151

Post by breadsniffer01 »

ThalesX wrote: post #73

As a developer but also product person, I keep trying to use AI to code for me. I keep failing, because of context length, because of shit output from the model, because of lack of any kind of architecture etc etc etc. I'm probably dumb as hell, because I just can't get it to do anything remotely useful, more than helping me with leetcode. Just yesterday I tried to feed it a simple HTML page to extract a selector, I…

A lot of startups are selling the dream/hype of not ever having to learn to code. Be aware that it’s hype. Learn to code if you want to build stuff. They will be tools for those that have the knowledge needed to effectively use them.

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#152

Post by pzo »

ardaoweo wrote: post #93
MSFT_Edging wrote: post #67

Humans seek work that provides satisfaction and meaning in their life. For every technological advancement, artisans are the first to be made obsolete. Sure we have landfills full of unworn textiles, the market says its good, but overall, we keep destroying what allows humans to seek meaning. Our governments and society have made it clear, if you don't produce value, you don't deserve dignity. We have outsourced art…

If we got universal basic income, people could do whatever they want. I for one would be content spending my time gardening and trekking in the nature. I despise office work and do it only for money. It's forcing the rich to give us UBI that is the problem.

There will be only just few countries that are winners in this game. Do you believe e.g. USA will provide UBI for other countries or even only neighbours like Mexico? I don't think so. And once there is big unemployment that USA border will be filled even more with migrants or people unhappy with the situation.

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#153

Post by xcv123 »

mym1990 wrote: post #30
mattlondon wrote: post #8

There is no way this is going to make it so that "engineers can focus on more interesting problems and engineering teams can strive for more ambitious goals." Instead it will mean that bosses can fire 75-90% of the (very expensive) engineers, with the ones who remain left to prompt the AI and clean up any mistakes/misunderstandings. I guess this is the future. We've coded ourselves out of a job. People are smiling an…

How is this any different than the industrial revolution ushering in a new age, or for that matter any technology that creates huge efficiencies in labor? The truth is that the future is still very uncertain, and while the easiest thing to do is yell "they took er jerbs" from the top of your lungs, maybe think about how to effectively move forward into the future. There is a book called "Who Moved My Cheese?" and I w…

> the easiest thing to do is yell "they took er jerbs

If the goal with AGI is to literally take all of our jobs (all jobs in all sectors) then what are you suggesting we can do instead?

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#154

Post by burningChrome »

CipherThrowaway wrote: post #112
ThalesX wrote: post #73

As a developer but also product person, I keep trying to use AI to code for me. I keep failing, because of context length, because of shit output from the model, because of lack of any kind of architecture etc etc etc. I'm probably dumb as hell, because I just can't get it to do anything remotely useful, more than helping me with leetcode. Just yesterday I tried to feed it a simple HTML page to extract a selector, I…

Ditto. I started out excited about LLMs and eager to use them everywhere, but have become steadily disillusioned as I have tried to apply them to daily tasks, and seen others try and fail in the same way. Honestly, LLMs can't even get language right. They produce generic, amateurish copy that reads like it's written by committee. GPT can't perform to the level of a middle market copywriter or content marketer. I am c…

>> Honestly, LLMs can't even get language right. They produce generic, amateurish copy that reads like it's written by committee.

I've had the same experience as well. I heard tons of people clamoring about the ability for LLM's to write SEO copy for you and how you can churn out web content so much faster now. I tried using it to churn out some very specific blog posts for an aborist client of mine.

The results were really bad. I had to re-write and clarify a lot of what it spit out. The grammar was not very good and it was really hard to read with very poorly structured sentences that would end aburptly and other glaring issues.

I did this right after a guy I play hockey with said he uses it all the time to write emails for him and pays the monthly subscription in order to have it write all kinds of things for me every day. After my trial, I was really wondering how obvious it was that he was doing that and how his clients thought about him knowing how poorly the stuff these LLM's were putting out.

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#155

Post by nrub »

jasfi wrote: post #63

Is Devin a new LLM? Perhaps equiped with code and deploy plug-ins? The comparisons against other LLMs would suggest so. The real world eval benchmark puts Claude 2 way ahead of GPT-4, which doesn't sound right.

I've seen a few suspect benchmarks for recent announcements of LLM releases. I'm sure they made an attempt at an honest benchmark, but until there's an independent assessment and benchmark (preferably multiple) you have to assume that there's bias in anyone's self published benchmarks like this.

I'm guessing it's a fine-tuning of some existing LLM model or API, but this largely seems to be an "agent" and UI that includes some SWE like workflow coding to allow more complex requests to be asked than just an LLM could provide.

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#157

Post by n0sleep »

thfuran wrote: post #26
bigyikes wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If an AI was truly capable of replacing engineers en mass, the upside would hugely outweigh the downside. Engineering muscle will be limited by chips instead of brains. Injecting millions of AI “engineers” into any economy would be a massive boon. Many of us would be out of work, but if we can redistribute the AI-generated surplus, this will still be a net-win for us all. I think the top engineers will still be able…

>if we can redistribute the AI-generated surplus, this will still be a net-win for us all. We can't.

Correction: we won't.

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#158

Post by n0sleep »

faefox wrote: post #47
bigyikes wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If an AI was truly capable of replacing engineers en mass, the upside would hugely outweigh the downside. Engineering muscle will be limited by chips instead of brains. Injecting millions of AI “engineers” into any economy would be a massive boon. Many of us would be out of work, but if we can redistribute the AI-generated surplus, this will still be a net-win for us all. I think the top engineers will still be able…

> "if we can redistribute the AI-generated surplus" I'm curious to know why you think there is even the slightest chance of this happening.

[flagged]

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#159

Post by ipaddr »

raytopia wrote: post #102
steve_adams_86 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you expect would cause the next winter? Or in other words, what capabilities of AI in this context do you expect will stall next?

Failing to meet investors hype would be the biggest reason in my book. Also it seems like training and running these systems is incredibly costly and the prices AI companies charge for their products are being subsidized by investor money, which won't last forever.

The investor money running out is a likely outcome which will push ai prices higher and change who uses it.

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#160

Post by pj_mukh »

MSFT_Edging wrote: post #101
ardaoweo wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we got universal basic income, people could do whatever they want. I for one would be content spending my time gardening and trekking in the nature. I despise office work and do it only for money. It's forcing the rich to give us UBI that is the problem.

Sure but UBI would never afford a garden. It would be bare minimum to survive, if that. We'd need a complete restructuring of society to even approach dignity via UBI.

Unless of course the robots built the gardens thereby driving the cost of gardens down to amounts accessible by UBI. Or so goes the theory.
Post reply on HN