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

Thoughts on the Future of Software Development

sheshbabu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 434 posts

Re: Thoughts on the Future of Software Development

#381

Post by kevindamm »

JohnFen wrote: post #256
brabel wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it were purely random it would generate rubbish.

Not necessarily, but even in the cases where that's true, there will be the occasional result that surprises (in a good way).

This reminds me of when I would be surprised by AI bots I coded up for video games. Yeah, sometimes they beat me, and their strategies were often a mix of RNG and heuristics so I was certainly surprised by their behavior on many occasions. But would I consider them creative? No. Would they fool some people into thinking they had creativity and agency? Sure.

Re: Thoughts on the Future of Software Development

#382

Post by kevindamm »

dartos wrote: post #94
couchand wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I mean it’s definitely a weaker argument than 2 years ago. Is it? I see no evidence that machines are any closer to "thinking creatively" than they ever have been. We certainly have been developing our capacity for computation to a great extent, but it's not at all evident that statistical methods and creativity are the same thing.

I can ask my computer to write a backstory for my dnd character, give it a few details, and it makes one. Sometimes it adds an extra detail or two even! A few years ago that was almost unthinkable. The best we had was arithmetic over abstract language concepts (KING - MAN = QUEEN) We don’t have a solid definition of “creativity” so the goalpost can move around a lot, but the idea that a machine can not create new pro…

actually, KING - MAN is a neuter ruler. You need to add WOMAN to that vector to get QUEEN.

Sometimes. If the embeddings were trained well.

Re: Thoughts on the Future of Software Development

#383

Post by bgandrew »

agentultra wrote: post #375
adrianN wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think anyone wants elegant proofs for their software's correctness. As long as the code is proven correct, programmers would be satisfied.

I had mentioned that. This is true today when software developers are writing proofs and why automation is useful. You would still need to be able to read the proof that a computer generated and understand what it contains in order to judge whether it is correct with respect to your specifications. So in some sense elegance would be useful since the proof isn’t written by a human but has to be understood by one. If t…

Meanwhile, the shovels learned to solve mathematical problems of the international math olympiad.

https://deepmind.google/discover/blog/alphageometry-an-olymp...

Re: Thoughts on the Future of Software Development

#384

Post by 0xedd »

robryan wrote: post #247
wongarsu wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I agree, but "1" must include all tasks where a mistake could lead to liabilities for the company, which is probably most tasks If you hire a junior programmer and they make a mistake, they aren't held liable either. Sure, you can fire them, but unless there's malice or gross negligence the liability buck stops at the company. The same can be said about the wealth of software currently involved in producing softwar…

Even with a junior there is generally a logic to the mistake and a fairly direct path to improving in future. I just don't know if the next token was chosen to be x statistically is going to be able to get to that level.

Good thing LLMs aren't a glorified statistical model, then, eh?

Anyway, why wouldn't there be? You reach out to the parent company with an issue and request for improvement. If you're a big enough client, you get your request prioritized higher. Same as with any other product that's part of your product today.

The appliance of LLMs today isn't straight up text in, text out; It has become more complex than that. Enough that it can be improved without improving the LLM model.

Your argument is moot.

Re: Thoughts on the Future of Software Development

#385

Post by 0xedd »

acedTrex wrote: post #109
pizzafeelsright wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue future engineers should be worried a bit. We no longer need to hire new developers. I was not trained professionally yet I'm writing production code that's passing code reviews in languages I never used. I will create a prompt, validate it compiles, passes tests, have it explain so I understand it was written as expected and write documentation about the code, write the PR, and I am seen as a competent…

I have yet to see either copilot or gpt4 generate code that I would come close to accepting in a PR from one of my devs, so I struggle to imagine what kind of domain you are in that the code it generates actually makes it through review.

You simply don't know how to use it. It's not meant as "develop this feature". It's meant to reduce the time it takes you to do something you're always good at. The prompt will be in the form of "write this function with x/y/z constraints and a/b/c design choices". You do a few touch ups, which is quick because you're good at said domain, and then your PR it. The bottom line is, it took you much less time to do the same thing.

Then again, it's always dinosaurs who value their own teachings, above anything else, and try to cling on to it, at any cost, without learning new tools. So, while the industry is going through major changes (2023 saw a 30% decrease in new hires. Among 940 companies surveyed, 40% expect layoffs due to AI), people should adapt rather than ignore the signs.

Re: Thoughts on the Future of Software Development

#386

Post by JackMorgan »

scubbo wrote: post #296
Normalcy294812 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the Book Title. It looks like an interesting read.

Caution - lots of people like to talk about this "code archeology" idea as if it's a central driving point of the book, whereas in fact it's mentioned once in passing in the prologue and is never again relevant to the story. Don't get me wrong, it's still a decent book on its own merits - but don't go into it expecting that to be the main point of the book (I did, and disappointed as a result).

As a counterpoint, the main nemesis of the book comes from software that is found in archaeological expedition. While software archeology doesn't show up after the first chapter, the ramifications of what happens in that world due to so much software is pretty central.

Re: Thoughts on the Future of Software Development

#387

Post by temporarely »

sanity wrote: post #119
warbled_tongue wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This resonates strongly with me. I don't want to describe the painting, I want to paint it. If this is indeed where we end up, I don't know that I'll change professions (I'm 30+ years into it), but the joy will be gone. It will truly become "just a job".

I remember back in the 80s I had friends who enjoyed coding in assembly and felt that using higher-level languages was "cheating" - isn't this just a continuation of that?

Not commenting on the mindset of earlier programmers, rather the analogy you offer: language level abstraction is entirely unlike process specialization.

For example, when moving up to C from assembler, the task of the "programmer" remains invariant and the language tool affords broader accessibility to the profession since not everyone likes to flip bytes. There is no subdivision of overall task of "coding a software product".

With AI coders, there is task specialization, and, as pointed out, what's left on the table is the least appetizing of the software tasks: being a patch monkey.

This is the issue.

Re: Thoughts on the Future of Software Development

#388

Post by AlwaysRock »

scubbo wrote: post #296
Normalcy294812 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the Book Title. It looks like an interesting read.

Caution - lots of people like to talk about this "code archeology" idea as if it's a central driving point of the book, whereas in fact it's mentioned once in passing in the prologue and is never again relevant to the story. Don't get me wrong, it's still a decent book on its own merits - but don't go into it expecting that to be the main point of the book (I did, and disappointed as a result).

I'd argue that while its not a core diving part narrative... It is central to the idea of the book and its sequel. It's a decent sized book with a lot of ideas and the idea of code archeology and the repercussions of it are what the book is about as much as any of the other main ideas.

But yes, if you want a book that focused only on that... This is going to disapoint.

Re: Thoughts on the Future of Software Development

#389

Post by AlwaysRock »

scubbo wrote: post #296
Normalcy294812 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the Book Title. It looks like an interesting read.

Caution - lots of people like to talk about this "code archeology" idea as if it's a central driving point of the book, whereas in fact it's mentioned once in passing in the prologue and is never again relevant to the story. Don't get me wrong, it's still a decent book on its own merits - but don't go into it expecting that to be the main point of the book (I did, and disappointed as a result).

I'd argue that while its not a core diving part narrative... It is central to the idea of the book and its sequel. It's a decent sized book with a lot of ideas and the idea of code archeology and the repercussions of it are what the book is about as much as any of the other main ideas.

But yes, if you want a book that focused only on that... This is going to disappoint.

Re: Thoughts on the Future of Software Development

#390

Post by AlwaysRock »

Normalcy294812 wrote: post #176
AlwaysRock wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the future imagined by A Fire Upon the Deep and its sequel. While less focused on the code being generated by ai, it features seemingly endless amounts of code and programs that can do almost anything but the difficulty is finding the program that works for you and is safe to use. To some extent... This is already the world we live in. A lot of code is unreadable without a lot of effort or expertise. If all c…

Thanks for the Book Title. It looks like an interesting read.

No problem. I've been a sci fi reader my entire life and was shocked I hadnt stumbled across Vinge earlier. The sequel/prequel to Fire Upon the Deep, called A Deepness in the Sky, is arguably even better and the same idea of tech/code being used and customized far after its written is even more central to the plot.

Two of my favorite reads of the last few years, so I highly recommend them.

Futher... After some digging it looks like there is an old slashdot discussion on the same topic: https://slashdot.org/story/06/11/04/0622246/no-more-coding-f...

Likely some spoilers for the books in there so may be worth holding off until after you've read them if you intend to.

Post reply on HN