A Research Preview of Codex

Post by ajkjk » Sun, May 18, 2025, 9:22 PM UTC

eru wrote: post #455

ajkjk wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am on about the fact that you are imagining something working in a way that it does not work in practice. You have two choices: 1. A developer makes a PR. They build the app and run it themselves to make sure it works, does what they intended, and nothing unexpected happens, and report on their testing in the PR. There's also a suite of automated tests. Between these you are confident that you can rubber-stamp it w…

The non-developer can also kick off a build and test the app. So they can at least check whether the change does what they wanted it to do. For this to be useful, the code doesn't even have to be good: think of it as a more accurate way to gather requirements and make a prototype. That's useful, even if you throw away the code.

Post by eru » Mon, May 19, 2025, 12:15 AM UTC

ajkjk wrote: post #461

eru wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The non-developer can also kick off a build and test the app. So they can at least check whether the change does what they wanted it to do. For this to be useful, the code doesn't even have to be good: think of it as a more accurate way to gather requirements and make a prototype. That's useful, even if you throw away the code.

I've never heard of a nondeveloper having a dev environment set up for testing. Often that can quite technical.

Post by tom_m » Mon, May 19, 2025, 1:45 PM UTC

mullingitover wrote: post #448

lispisok wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You really dont see why somebody wouldnt like a megacorp to take their hard work, use it to make a billion dollars, dont see a cent themselves, while struggling to buy a house in this very unaffordable housing market? https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/total-happiness-in-the-world-...

Google, Microsoft, Meta, IBM, Red Hat, etc. are huge players in open source, they probably contribute significantly more hours of work in building and maintaining major open source projects than the hobbyists. Not that hobbyists don't contribute, but these models are certainly being trained on the work of salaried engineers as much as their trained on hobbyists' spare time projects.

Post by tom_m » Mon, May 19, 2025, 1:54 PM UTC

blibble wrote: post #247

hintymad wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks we are in this interesting cycle: millions of engineers contribute to open-source on github. The best of our minds use the code to develop powerful models to replace exactly these engineers. In fact, the more code a group contributes to github, the easier it is for the companies to replace this group. Case in point, frontend engineers are impacted most so far. Does this mean people will be less incentivized…

> Does this mean people will be less incentivized to contribute to open source as time goes by? personally, I completely stopped 2 years ago it's the same as the stack overflow problem: the incentive to contribute tends towards zero, at which point the plagiarism machine stops improving

Post by tom_m » Mon, May 19, 2025, 2:23 PM UTC

username223 wrote: post #327

hintymad wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks we are in this interesting cycle: millions of engineers contribute to open-source on github. The best of our minds use the code to develop powerful models to replace exactly these engineers. In fact, the more code a group contributes to github, the easier it is for the companies to replace this group. Case in point, frontend engineers are impacted most so far. Does this mean people will be less incentivized…

> Does this mean people will be less incentivized to contribute to open source as time goes by? Yes. I certainly don't intend to put any free code online until I can legally bar AI bros from using it without payment. As Mike Monteiro put it long ago, "F** you, pay me" ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVkLVRt6c1U )