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

551–560 of 604 posts

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#551

Post by azinman2 »

Rumudiez wrote: post #254
golergka wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What will be left? Where will we be? Just stranded without dignity or purpose, left to rot when we no longer produce value. Nobody stops you from paying $1000 for a shirt made by artisans right now. Do you want to? > Our governments and society have made it clear, if you don't produce value, you don't deserve dignity. It's not somebody else who decided that. It's you.

I have a few handmade shirts that were all between $70-100. I buy the occasional oddity from Etsy and those things (the ones I buy) are all handmade and most of them are quite affordable – on par with shopping at Target for comparison. I’m 100% certain the artists are thankful they can be professional creators instead of becoming a wage worker or living off of some form of basic income

Where do you get them?

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#553

Post by StickyRibbs »

I've worked on very complex systems - The disney streaming platform (before it was disney), live video streaming systems, banking transaction systems, your run of the mill crud software with kafka clusters piping mind numbing amounts of data, netflix and a few other large engineering heavy companies.

No engineering company worth their weight is going to build a world class technology business purely with generative AI in its current state. The risk in doing so currently is total and utter failure. I have a very hard time believing we're any where near that capability. Maybe your mom and pop startup could hire a prompt engineer to build a website and simple tool but we have yet to see those exercises surfaced to the mainstream; it's purely speculative.

I say, rest easy programmers. Your careers will be enriched more than axed with generative AI as a support tool for many years to come.

Also, if anyone who works in this field has a strong opposing belief, then consider OpenAI engineers are programming themselves out of a job which obviously is not the case.

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#554

Post by CipherThrowaway »

famouswaffles wrote: post #525
ProfessorLayton wrote: post #516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Rie Kudan won an award on a novel she used GPT to verbatim ghostwrite (no edits essentially) 5% of. Her words, not mine. Who knows how much more of the novel is edited GPT. That a professional human novelist was able to leverage GPT for their book isn't disproving the grandparent's post. They knew what good looks like, and if it wasn't good they wouldn't have kept it in the book.

That's my point. Good writing can come out of LLMs and nobody has to take my word for it. When part of the OPs point seems to be that LLMs can't write good stuff then that's proof enough. If you're talking about replacing professionals wholesale then I never made that argument.

Good writing can also come out of Markov chains. Or even RNGs - if your novelist has enough time to filter the output.

LLMs can't write good stuff. Human writers can write good stuff. When a good writer uses an LLM in their writing process, that writer can certainly produce good writing.

When an AI hypebro who is otherwise a bad writer uses an LLM in their writing process, they still produce bad writing.

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#555

Post by [deleted] »

CipherThrowaway wrote: post #554
famouswaffles wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's my point. Good writing can come out of LLMs and nobody has to take my word for it. When part of the OPs point seems to be that LLMs can't write good stuff then that's proof enough. If you're talking about replacing professionals wholesale then I never made that argument.

Good writing can also come out of Markov chains. Or even RNGs - if your novelist has enough time to filter the output. LLMs can't write good stuff. Human writers can write good stuff. When a good writer uses an LLM in their writing process, that writer can certainly produce good writing. When an AI hypebro who is otherwise a bad writer uses an LLM in their writing process, they still produce bad writing.

[deleted]

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#556

Post by HarHarVeryFunny »

CapsAdmin wrote: post #546
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's worth pointing out that on their eval set for "issues resolved" they are getting 13.86%. While visually this looks impressive compared to the others, anything that only really works 13.86% of the time, when the verification of the work takes nearly as much time as the work would have anyway, isn't useful. Yeah, I remember speech recognition taking decades to improve, and being more of a novelty - not useful at…

I can see this being useful already (assuming context length is not an issue) as some sort of github service trying to solve github issues throughout the day. Or for example if you commit todo's in your code, the ai will pick up on them and give you some options later on. If the failure rate is 14%, just let it try a bunch of times. (half joking here) The way I see it is at least the project issues are getting some a…

I could perhaps see more value for this, at this level of capability, in writing test cases, in cases where the project is setup in a way to let them be run and get feedback.

This would be useful in cases where test coverage is incomplete, maybe for auto-discovering/confirming bugs, and would really be needed if it's trying to fix bugs itself, especially if one dared let it commit bug fixes - would want to know that the fix worked and didn't break anything else (regression test - run other test cases too).

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#557

Post by MSFT_Edging »

andruby wrote: post #529
MSFT_Edging wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love to live in a Communist society. I think our technological capabilities are to the point where a centrally managed economy is not only possible, but extremely doable. The main issue being, our governments and society have made it clear that the opinions of those who hold Capital are far more important than the unproductive surplus. Our entire society now is based around consuming cheap products we don't need,…

Thank you for the thoughtful post. I hope that the current circumstances trigger a renewed interest in thinking about how we organise our society. It would be great if that could be done rationally, without taboos. I don't have high hopes though. The people in power want to stay in power, and any hint at socialistic or communistic ideas are quickly shot down. Communism as implemented by Soviet Russia was pretty bad a…

I suggest actually reading up on how past or existing Communist countries worked. The Soviet system eventually failed, yes, but not before great strides in a lot of areas. There is an incredible amount of nuance lost in how the west generally talks about these systems, some from general misunderstandings, some from Orientalism, some from downright nationalism.

For example, the "soviet" system was a bottom up democratic system where labor unions effectively formed the foundation. There was a lot of thought into how the system was formed and even the CIA admitted Stalin was more of a team captain than a dictator. Hell you can get a lot of interesting tidbits into declassified reports on the Soviet Union. There's the famous one about how the soviets were better fed than their American counterparts, despite the claims of breadlines.

It's really quite sad that we are basically not allowed to learn from the positive aspects of these projects.

For example, people hate on Stalin a lot, but his 5-year plans were so wildly productive and successful, even a young South Korea deep in a western backed dictatorship copied the idea in order to boot strap their industrial base. China continues to use this idea, the simple method of setting goals in the short, medium, and long term in order to use resources effectively.

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#558

Post by MSFT_Edging »

esoterica wrote: post #506
MSFT_Edging wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pre-industrial societies may not have had flat screen tvs, but they had time. The only thing you can't buy.

They did not actually have time because they mostly died in infancy. That said if you are satisfied with a pre industrial quality of life no one is stopping you from doing zero hours of work and just becoming homeless.

It's always interesting to see the default argument of "u dont like it? just be homeless".

Where does that come from? I see it all the time. It's like there's zero ability to step outside the black and white. Either you must be totally onboard with the current system and not question the negative aspects, or you must live without dignity in the streets.

What I'm saying is we really don't need to be working 40+hrs/week in order to enjoy these advancements. People don't need to be made homeless in order for scientists who research these medicines to be paid peanuts.

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#559

Post by notpachet »

kjqgqkejbfefn wrote: post #544
notpachet wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think I'm particularly in denial about the prospects of AI. I think it's going to be hugely disruptive and could possibly put me out of a job. But I'd like to posit a hypothetical counterpoint, just to get you thinking. So far, all of the work on AGI has been the result of brute forcing. We've tried to develop a structural understanding of how the human brain works, and we've failed. So we've fallen back to t…

>So far, all of the work on AGI has been the result of brute forcing. We've tried to develop a structural understanding of how the human brain works, and we've failed. So we've fallen back to torturing circuits into reorienting themselves into compression algorithms for human knowledge. The mechanisms that these tortured circuits used for doing so, the structures they produced in N-dimensional space to embody that kn…

That's all very well and good from a theoretical, scientific perspective. But we're hooking these things up to real-world applications that often call for deterministic, structural understanding of their inner workings for safety reasons.

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#560

Post by famouswaffles »

CipherThrowaway wrote: post #554
famouswaffles wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's my point. Good writing can come out of LLMs and nobody has to take my word for it. When part of the OPs point seems to be that LLMs can't write good stuff then that's proof enough. If you're talking about replacing professionals wholesale then I never made that argument.

Good writing can also come out of Markov chains. Or even RNGs - if your novelist has enough time to filter the output. LLMs can't write good stuff. Human writers can write good stuff. When a good writer uses an LLM in their writing process, that writer can certainly produce good writing. When an AI hypebro who is otherwise a bad writer uses an LLM in their writing process, they still produce bad writing.

>Good writing can also come out of Markov chains.

Waiting for the Author who has used a Markov Chain to ghost write.

>LLMs can't write good stuff. Human writers can write good stuff. When a good writer uses an LLM in their writing process, that writer can certainly produce good writing.

Give it a rest. The author was quite clear she copy pasted sections of writing in.

Post reply on HN