Live data from Hacker News

Devin: AI Software Engineer

cognition-labs.com

581–590 of 604 posts

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But thats OK! THis is exactly what I want. I dont want to describe some enterprise architure with DR and blah. No - I want the little utils that I just want to appear like little magic fairy dust... Little apps. This is how a new eco system grows.

But if building an app is as easy as voicing a requirement, and getting an updated version is as simple as asking for a change, then why should there be an ecosystem at all, rather than just bespoke on-the-fly apps for every single individual? As a tangent, I've been thinking about this in regards to the edtech space. For now, the focus is on GenAI tools for quickly building courses, but if we have AI with the combin…

I think a lot of our plans with AI are skeuomorphic. (Skeuomorphs are when an older, outdated thing is preserved in the updated thing, like how the Save icon is a floppy disk.)

"Generative AI will mean that Pixar movies will be made by AI!" Likelier it means that generative AI will create an entirely new medium beyond movies.

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#582
post #355

>> With our advances in long-term reasoning and planning, Devin can plan and execute complex engineering tasks requiring thousands of decisions. They'd better have really advanced reasoning and planning capabilities way beyond everything that anyone else knows how to do with LLMs. There's a growing body of literature that leaves no doubt that LLMs can't reason and can't plan. For a quick summary of some such results…

'plan' is an ambigous word. 'plan' for Devin means break a complexe task in subtask and then generate code. Whereas 'plan' in the paper you link is never define, so I am not sure what his author want to demonstrate, that LLM doesn't have free will ? that LLM are not universal problem solve ? It is a quite confuse paper.

Plans and planning have precise formal definitions, probably not included in the article I linked because it is a short commentary article. See e.g. the following for the standard definitions:

http://www.spacebook-project.eu/pubs/CogSci-13.pdf

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#583
post #225

Don't get it. If we have this amazing AI why don't we make good use of it? 90% of my job is not to write code (as a senior software engineer), is to: - deobfuscate complex requirements into well divided chunks - find gaps or holes in requirements so that I have to write the minimal amount of code - understand codebases so that the implementation fits nicely I don't need an "AI software engineer", I need an "AI people…

[deleted]

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#584
post #225

Don't get it. If we have this amazing AI why don't we make good use of it? 90% of my job is not to write code (as a senior software engineer), is to: - deobfuscate complex requirements into well divided chunks - find gaps or holes in requirements so that I have to write the minimal amount of code - understand codebases so that the implementation fits nicely I don't need an "AI software engineer", I need an "AI people…

You should really take a look at GoScope.AI.

Its the AI people person who gives me well defined tasks

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#585
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, you've entered the first stage of grief. Denial. Next you'll start bargaining, you'll get angry, and you'll become depressed, eventually you'll just accept that AI is taking over software. In my mind, I've concluded that I have less than 3 years to find an off ramp.

It's the AI hype group which are in a stage of denial. "Surely if we generate code, it means we can replace developers right?" Well no, it's not nearly enough. Good code generation with a UI is already a thing since the 90s, it's replacing developers as much as Frontpage and WordPress do. The average developer writes 100 lines per day anyways so the speed of writing those lines doesn't matter. Software is an interper…

Oh Frontpage. Thanks for that; you’ve made my day.

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#586
post #6

I mean, this might just be existential cope, but my first thought when looking at the Upwork demo posted on Twitter ( https://x.com/cognition_labs/status/1767548768734294113?s=20 ) was that it seemed a little bit suspicious. Namely, the client was asking for an unusually specific (for Upwork) ask. It was an almost perfect example of a job to be given to an AI agent for testing purposes.

I tend to agree. I really want to see what this does with an open-source backlog. The more mundane (yet critical) of a project, the better. What would be good projects to feed it? I suggested Mozilla and llama.cpp, but there's got to be something better as a use-case for it.

Using this on memory-unsafe languages is just asking for trouble.

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#587
post #45
post #6

I mean, this might just be existential cope, but my first thought when looking at the Upwork demo posted on Twitter ( https://x.com/cognition_labs/status/1767548768734294113?s=20 ) was that it seemed a little bit suspicious. Namely, the client was asking for an unusually specific (for Upwork) ask. It was an almost perfect example of a job to be given to an AI agent for testing purposes.

You're looking at the worst version that will ever be released. If these guys don't get better over time, someone else will.

Cue Microsoft AutoDev.

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#588

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…

Long ago most humans spent their time and energy on farming so they wouldn't starve. We automated that with a couple of Agricultural Revolutions. Then the majority of us spent our time and energy in factories. That got automated during the Industrial Revolution. So we moved to service and knowledge jobs. And now we're potentialy seeing the start of automation in those knowledge jobs. Will this be a painful revolution…

TL;DR

Premise is kinda all wrong, but IMO some interesting questions nonetheless are posed at the end of your comment.

First agricultural revolution was farming, that allowed for cities. Second agricultural revolution overlaps with the industrial revolution.

That was the transition from having only bio-mechanical energy available to also mechanical energy (the only source of power was no longer just muscles, but then things like steam power). The industrial revolution ended in the mid 1800s - a full century before the transition to service and knowledge jobs. Still, by the end of the second agricultural revolution, 50% of the labor force are still farmers. The industrial revolution was done decades before manufacturing labor participation peaked (in the US).

The industrial revolution was NOT the shift into factories, it was the advent of steam engine and steam power. You didn't have to pull a cart with a horse anymore, there were steam engines (trains). This is WAY before the model T comes out.

The idea that the majority of laborers hopped (in discrete steps) from farming, to factories, to service jobs is wrong. The percentage shift is smaller and more gradual than would be commonly believed, and plays over relatively long periods of time, most of those time periods playing out over just the last 400 years.

> Long ago most humans spent their time and energy on farming so they wouldn't starve. We automated that with a couple of Agricultural Revolutions.

This statements is misleading to the point of being incorrect.

This resource states there were three major agricultural revolutions [1]

Other resources refer to "The agricultural revolution", which was the second. "The Second Agricultural Revolution was both a contributing factor and consequence of the Industrial Revolution, which took place in the 1700s-1800s. As labor productivity and agricultural technology use increased and the population boomed due to a growing food supply, many people were left without land or work in rural areas. Thus, they migrated to the city, typically to find work in manufacturing." [1]

Note, by 1800 in the US, still 80% of the labor force worked as farmers. [2] Thus, there was a shedding from 80%+ to 80%, and many of those left for other work, namely cities. It's not the case though that the agricultural revolution caused humans to go from 90% farming to 10% farming, with everyone there going into manufacturing - it's much small numbers and much more gradual shift that occurred over a few centuries (notably, just the last 3)

The breakdown:

- first agricultural revolution allowed humans to farm and not be nomadic (12k years ago, I'm still shocked by how relatively recent this was)

- second agricultural revolution leveraged the industrial revolution, where a lot fewer people were needed for farming (but still a large number were required)

- third agriculatural revolution was in the 1900s and lead to much better crop yields

- arguably there is a 4th agricultural revolution underway today. I was talking to a farmer a year ago and they stated how amazing the tractors are now. They literally drive themselves & combine GPS data and automated controls to control the fertilization and watering down to the square foot.

Still today, 20% of the total global population is doing subsistence agriculture. [3] I would guess that a large fraction are still growing their own gardens for food supplementation.

> That got automated during the Industrial Revolution. So we moved to service and knowledge jobs.

"The Industrial Revolution was the transition from creating goods by hand to using machines. Its start and end are widely debated by scholars, but the period generally spanned from about 1760 to 1840" [4]

The industrial revolution is the transition from near exclusive muscle power (humans/oxen/horses) to steam power, machine power. From 1800 to 1860 the percentage of people (in the US) that were farmers went from 80% to 50%. It takes a lot longer before that percentage falls below 20%. The transition to service and knowledge jobs wasn't until the 1960s, that's about 200 years after the industrial revolution.

Still though, I can't find a single resource that shows US manufacturing percentage was ever greater than 30% of the workforce. The resources I find show there was a consistent increase in manufacturing output until essentially the late 1900s (speaking of the the US only), while at the same time there was a reduction in the percentage workforce in manufacturing.

> And now we're potentialy seeing the start of automation in those knowledge jobs.

Potentially is the operative word. "ThePrimeTime" aka "Primeagen" recently did a video on Devin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80MPXoRHvK8 (start at 8:50, until about 9:45 mark)

His assessment, until Devin is 100x more powerful, two orders of magnitude better, only then will Devin even potentially start taking over jobs from humans. I generally agree with that take. I think we get there in maybe 20 to 40 years from now.

Personally, that idea seems similar to me as the idea that cars are imminently about to be self driving and you can lease your self driving car as a taxi during work-hours. That idea was floated by Musk since 2014, and every year since, that was going to be a reality within one year. [5]

--------------------------

I think your last questions though are very interesting, namely these: "Will this be a painful revolution as the Industrial one? Where will we spend our time and energy on next?"

Though, I find your premises to be inaccurate, and your timeline for when this next revolution is off by at least 30 years. It's yet to even start. I'll note we're still living through the automation of the service industry, that revolution is not yet done - computers have not yet eaten the world. As an example, the first successful 'pets.com' is still less than 20 years old, and that is just the act of automating a store-front to purchase cat food - plenty of examples of industries and services that are still largely paper based. A couple years ago I interviewed for a startup that was automating food chain supply, they noted that industry is still almost entirely paper based, and that is in 2021!

[1] https://populationeducation.org/a-timeline-of-the-three-majo...

[2] https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=11...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsistence_agriculture

[4] https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/industrial...

[5] https://futurism.com/video-elon-musk-promising-self-driving-...

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#589

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 democrat…

>For example, people hate on Stalin a lot, but his 5-year plans were so wildly productive and successful you mean productive as in Holodomor?

Yea, it's insane OP went from a really great comment at the top to this. Weird.

Re: Devin: AI Software Engineer

#590
post #225

Don't get it. If we have this amazing AI why don't we make good use of it? 90% of my job is not to write code (as a senior software engineer), is to: - deobfuscate complex requirements into well divided chunks - find gaps or holes in requirements so that I have to write the minimal amount of code - understand codebases so that the implementation fits nicely I don't need an "AI software engineer", I need an "AI people…

> If we have this amazing AI why don't we make good use of it? Aren't we all commenting on Devin's initial announcement published yesterday ? Give it some time. It's a safe bet that a lot of companies which employ software engineers are currently tripping over themselves to get on the Devin waitlist, and the inevitable superior iterations on the idea of an LLM-powered dev that will absolutely be coming out probably s…

> It's a safe bet that a lot of companies which employ software engineers are currently tripping over themselves to get on the Devin waitlist

Why is that safe to say? You just said this was announced yesterday. I don't think Devin is standing out to anyone right now.

Post reply on HN