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

AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

elroy.bot

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 218 posts

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#181

Post by victorbjorklund »

charcircuit wrote: post #176
bane wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course AI increases inequality. It's automated ladder pulling technology. To become good at something you have to work through the lower rungs and acquire skill. AI does all those lower level jobs, puts the people who need those jobs for experience on the street, and robs us of future experts. The people who benefit the most are those who are already up on top of the ladder investing billions to make the ladder ra…

AI can teach you the lower rungs more effectively than what existed before.

Honestly not sure it is easier to learn coding today than before. In theory maybe but in reality 99% of people will use AI as a crutch - half or learning is when you have to struggle a bit with something. If all the answers are always in front of you it will be harder to learn. I know it would be hard for me to learn if I could just ask for the code all the time.

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#182

Post by godelski »

per1Peteia wrote: post #177
godelski wrote: post #150

I think a good way to see it is "AI is good for prototyping. AI is not good for engineering" To clarify, I mean that the AI tools can help you get things done really fast but they lack both breadth and depth. You can move fast with them to generate proofs of concept (even around subproblems to large problems), but without breadth they lack the big picture context and without depth they lack the insights that any grey…

I was reading some stuff by Michael A. Jackson (Problem Frames Approach) and T.S.E Maibaum (Mathematical Foundations on Software Engineering) because I also had the impression that too much talk around LLM-assisted programming focuses on program text and annotations / documentation. Thinkers like Donald Schön thought about tacit knowledge-in-action and approached this with design philosophy. when looking at LLM-assis…

  > I suspect AI code editors have lots of said tacit knowledge baked in (via the black box itself or its engineers) but we would be better off thinking about this explicitly.
Until the AI is actually AGI I suspect it'll be better for us to do it. After all, if you don't do the design then you probably don't understand the design. Those details will kill you

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#183

Post by charcircuit »

imiric wrote: post #180
charcircuit wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI can teach you the lower rungs more effectively than what existed before.

And yet it's not used that way in the vast majority of cases. Most people don't want to learn. They want to get a result quickly, and move on.

There is a difference between pulling up a ladder and people choosing not to climb it.

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#184

Post by per1Peteia »

godelski wrote: post #182
per1Peteia wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was reading some stuff by Michael A. Jackson (Problem Frames Approach) and T.S.E Maibaum (Mathematical Foundations on Software Engineering) because I also had the impression that too much talk around LLM-assisted programming focuses on program text and annotations / documentation. Thinkers like Donald Schön thought about tacit knowledge-in-action and approached this with design philosophy. when looking at LLM-assis…

> I suspect AI code editors have lots of said tacit knowledge baked in (via the black box itself or its engineers) but we would be better off thinking about this explicitly. Until the AI is actually AGI I suspect it'll be better for us to do it. After all, if you don't do the design then you probably don't understand the design. Those details will kill you

100% agree

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#185

Post by bayindirh »

skmurphy wrote: post #128
bayindirh wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the CERN talk* [0] coined the term Pets vs. Cattle analogy, and it was way before VMs were cheap on bare metal. I think the word just evolved as the idea got rooted in the community. We use the same analogy for the last 20 years or so. Provisioning 150 cattle servers take 15 minutes or so, and we can provision a pet in a couple of hours, at most. [0]: https://www.engineyard.com/blog/pets-vs-cattle/ *: Engine Ya…

Randy Bias also claims authorship https://cloudscaling.com/blog/cloud-computing/the-history-of... this tweet by Tim Bell seems to indicate shared credit with Bill Baker and Randy Bias https://x.com/noggin143/status/354666097691205633 @randybias @dberkholz CERN's presentation of pets and cattle was derived from Randy's (and Bill Baker's previously).

I didn't mean to dispute who said it first, but wanted to say that we took the terms from CERN, and we got them around the time of their talk.

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#187

Post by amrocha »

charcircuit wrote: post #183
imiric wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet it's not used that way in the vast majority of cases. Most people don't want to learn. They want to get a result quickly, and move on.

There is a difference between pulling up a ladder and people choosing not to climb it.

It’s a very small difference. People would rather line up for the elevator than take the stairs. That’s just human nature.

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#188

Post by bubblyworld »

charcircuit wrote: post #183
imiric wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet it's not used that way in the vast majority of cases. Most people don't want to learn. They want to get a result quickly, and move on.

There is a difference between pulling up a ladder and people choosing not to climb it.

I agree with you - I learned to program because I found it fascinating, and wanted to know how my computer worked, not because it was the only option available to me at the time...

There are always people willing to take shortcuts at long-term expense. Frankly I'm fine with the selection pressure changing in our industry. Those who want to learn will still find a way to do it.

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#189

Post by vendiddy »

victorbjorklund wrote: post #181
charcircuit wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI can teach you the lower rungs more effectively than what existed before.

Honestly not sure it is easier to learn coding today than before. In theory maybe but in reality 99% of people will use AI as a crutch - half or learning is when you have to struggle a bit with something. If all the answers are always in front of you it will be harder to learn. I know it would be hard for me to learn if I could just ask for the code all the time.

It is but requires discipline.

I've been coding for 15 years but I find I'm able to learn new languages and concepts faster by asking questions to ChatGPT.

It takes discipline. I have to turn off cursor tab when doing coding exercises. I have to take the time to ask questions and follow-up questions.

But yes I worry it's too easy to use AI as a crutch

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#190

Post by ACCount36 »

victorbjorklund wrote: post #181
charcircuit wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI can teach you the lower rungs more effectively than what existed before.

Honestly not sure it is easier to learn coding today than before. In theory maybe but in reality 99% of people will use AI as a crutch - half or learning is when you have to struggle a bit with something. If all the answers are always in front of you it will be harder to learn. I know it would be hard for me to learn if I could just ask for the code all the time.

It's much, much, much easier.

I've been coding for decades already, but if I need to put something together in an unfamiliar language? I can just ask AI about any stupid noob mistake I make.

It knows every single stupid noob mistake, it knows every "how do I sort an array", and it explains well, with examples. Like StackOverflow on steroids.

The caveat is that you need to WANT to learn. If you don't, then not learning is easier than ever too.

Post reply on HN