Sorry, we will reach the heat death of the universe before I alter a single line of code simply because some LLM somewhere extruded incorrect synthetic text. That is so bonkers, I feel offended I even need to point out how bonkers it is.
Gaslight-driven development
71–80 of 113 posts
Re: Gaslight-driven development
#72Maybe it's spite-driven development, but I'd love to hear about someone who, upon learning that LLMs are suggesting endpoints in their API that don't exist, implements them specifically to respond with a status code[0] of "421: Misdirected Request". Or, for something less snarky and more in keeping with the actual intent of the code, "501: Not Implemented". If the potentially-implied "but it might be, later" of 501 i…
> "513: Your Coding Assistant Is Wrong"
You made me chuckle. Well played. Great stuff :)
May I, simply, also suggest:
HTTP 407 Hallucination
Meaning: The server understands the request but believes it to be incongruous with reality.-
Re: Gaslight-driven development
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
No you're most often breaking traffic laws and increasing a chance of a collision, than the off chance of needing to make such a maneuver to avoid an accident. The societal cost of collisions is worth more than your freedoms. Or you should pay higher premiums for turning those safety features off.
> No you're most often breaking traffic laws and increasing a chance of a collision, than the off chance of needing to make such a maneuver to avoid an accident For all you know I need to exit my lane in a hurry to avoid a collision. The car doesn't have the same context that the driver has. It only cares about staying between two painted lines, it might not have any idea about a truck coming straight at me going the…
It vibrates and tries to gently guide you. It will absolutely not overpower you if you are swerving in an emergency. You are talking hypothetical nonsense.
Re: Gaslight-driven development
#74Is there a general name and framing we could apply to these “AI” that is equally as accurate but sheds all of the human biases associated with the terms? Like… it’s just a really, really, really good autocomplete and sometimes I find thinking of it that way cleans up my whole mental model for its use.
Does that actually clean up your mental model though? At some number of "reallys" that autocomplete starts to sound like intelligence. Like, what is "taking customer requirements and turning them into working code" if not just really really really really really really really good autocomplete with this mental model?
A lot of people are just doing the job of a really good autocomplete, not being asked to make many, if any, nontrivial decisions in their job.
Taking requirements and making working code is something some models are adequate at. It’s all the stuff around that, which I think holds the value, such as deciding things like when the requirements are wrong.
Re: Gaslight-driven development
#75Is there a general name and framing we could apply to these “AI” that is equally as accurate but sheds all of the human biases associated with the terms? Like… it’s just a really, really, really good autocomplete and sometimes I find thinking of it that way cleans up my whole mental model for its use.
I like something related to "interns" (artificial interns?) because it keeps the implication that you still always have to double-check, review and verify the work they did.
Re: Gaslight-driven development
#76> Like it or not, we are already serving the machines.
The machines don’t give a shit, it’s the lawyers and bureaucrats you’re serving :)
Better or worse?
Re: Gaslight-driven development
#77Maybe it's spite-driven development, but I'd love to hear about someone who, upon learning that LLMs are suggesting endpoints in their API that don't exist, implements them specifically to respond with a status code[0] of "421: Misdirected Request". Or, for something less snarky and more in keeping with the actual intent of the code, "501: Not Implemented". If the potentially-implied "but it might be, later" of 501 i…
I humbly request, if you are going to do this, please, please...use the 418 response. It deserves wider adoption :-)
Re: Gaslight-driven development
#78Maybe it's spite-driven development, but I'd love to hear about someone who, upon learning that LLMs are suggesting endpoints in their API that don't exist, implements them specifically to respond with a status code[0] of "421: Misdirected Request". Or, for something less snarky and more in keeping with the actual intent of the code, "501: Not Implemented". If the potentially-implied "but it might be, later" of 501 i…
+1 for 513: Your Coding Assistant Is Wrong"
If we have 418, why not 513?
Re: Gaslight-driven development
#79Maybe it's spite-driven development, but I'd love to hear about someone who, upon learning that LLMs are suggesting endpoints in their API that don't exist, implements them specifically to respond with a status code[0] of "421: Misdirected Request". Or, for something less snarky and more in keeping with the actual intent of the code, "501: Not Implemented". If the potentially-implied "but it might be, later" of 501 i…
I humbly request, if you are going to do this, please, please...use the 418 response. It deserves wider adoption :-)
(on that note, I'm putting the kettle on :)
Re: Gaslight-driven development
#80Maybe it's spite-driven development, but I'd love to hear about someone who, upon learning that LLMs are suggesting endpoints in their API that don't exist, implements them specifically to respond with a status code[0] of "421: Misdirected Request". Or, for something less snarky and more in keeping with the actual intent of the code, "501: Not Implemented". If the potentially-implied "but it might be, later" of 501 i…
I humbly request, if you are going to do this, please, please...use the 418 response. It deserves wider adoption :-)
I think it's a good representation of a hallucination.