So now dogs are going to take my job? What's next? Snails? Rabbits? Wild salmon?
Cockroaches. Survivability, fast breeding, low resource needs, quite instrumentable.
I'm helping my dog vibe code games
331–340 of 404 posts
Re: I'm helping my dog vibe code games
#332Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are people who say that you should use a real artist instead of AI due to AI's water use. Nobody I know says this. In fact, I've never heard of this ever before, and I read artist and hobby communities pretty hostile to AI, but I never once read this nice strawman you've built. People say you should use a real artist instead of AI for a multitude of reasons: - Because they want to enjoy art created by humans.…
> A human being is not some number on a spreadsheet, built over 20 years in order to achieve some "smartness" goal But from the perspective of the business and capitalism that's exactly what a human is. A tool that consumes resources and hopefully produces more value for the business than it consumes. Sure we can dance around this and you can pretend your employer gives a shit about you and your family and your child…
> Sure we can dance around this and you can pretend your employer gives a shit about you and your family and your childhood stories but they don't.
I don’t get what you’re doing here. They didn’t say anything like that.
Re: I'm helping my dog vibe code games
#333This is basically a diffusion model: start from a random seed, use a generative process to transform it into something
Re: I'm helping my dog vibe code games
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Billions of people will be empowered to spin up whatever software they need on demand. … so long as they have the money, and the power grid survives the overtaxation. After all, why bother encouraging a culture where people are genuinely empowered to tweak and create their tools? Why encourage a culture of exploration, of playful cleverness? What use is there to being a hacker, of sharing knowledge? It’s definitely…
Hardware will get better, local models will get better, it won't be very long until running a coding agent off a few solar panels on your roof is viable. And if this isn't true, then the future I envision probably isn't going to happen and you lot can stop worrying about your jobs.
The way I see it is either it will work (which I doubt, but whatever) and I'm out of a job, or it doesn't work and the economy comes crashing down harder than ever seen in history and I'm out of a job.
Re: I'm helping my dog vibe code games
#335Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funny idea, but this proves my point that these tools are actually just slot machines.. Except the house in this case takes the money you give them lights it on fire. Notice how people also have weird superstitious habits when using LLM tools, "You gotta write the prompt this way, say this first" Without having any way to prove it works. Its very similar to the behavior of gamblers. "push the buttons in this order fo…
> these tools are actually just slot machines Slot machines that are biased toward producing jackpots. And "jackpots" are a metaphor for "training distribution".
Yeah. You always know you are doing something pretty unique when the LLM can conceptualize it (produce the right English output) but not put it into code.
Re: I'm helping my dog vibe code games
#336Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry but what do you mean crystal clear requirements? I don't particularly think "y7u8888888ftrg34BC" would pass as a crystal clear requirement at my workplace : Do you mean something different?
I mean you get a random game in the authors example :) But in real life you do not want a random game. That's what I mean, you need the great scaffolding + exact requirements. Then the prompt to do the implementation does not matter too much.
Recent research has shown that specs actually degrade output, so I’m more inclined to think you’ve got the slot machine mentality mentioned up-thread.
Re: I'm helping my dog vibe code games
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
This reaction feels like an llm wrote it
Just because LLMs habitually make negative comparisons doesn't mean we have to go around accusing anyone who uses them of having used an LLM.
I had to smile to myself when I noticed contrastive negation—with em dashes!—in a text written in the 90s. LLMs don't dictate what good writing is; people do.
Re: I'm helping my dog vibe code games
#338The real insight here is that the dog has better product instincts than most PMs I've worked with. It knows exactly what it wants (treat), doesn't overthink the implementation, and ships fast. Half the battle in software is having clear intent turns out that's species-agnostic.
Re: I'm helping my dog vibe code games
#339Earlier quoted context omitted.
The AI cannot drive meaning from the dog's input because there's no useful information encoded in there. It's effectively a random string (if there's less randomness, it's just because it's a dog's paw physically pressing on a keyboard). All the relevant information was in the initial prompt and the scaffolding. The dog was not even /dev/random, it was simply a trigger to "give it another go".
The shapes of clouds and positions of stars are essentially random, and yet humans derive meaning from both. I agree you could have gotten the same results via /dev/random, or probably by increasing the temperature on the model, but I suspect doing one of those things is important.
The LLM cannot derive meaning in a human sense.
The shapes of clouds and positions of stars aren't completely random; there is useful information in them, to varying degrees (e.g. some clouds do look like, say, a rabbit, enough that a majority of people will agree). The mechanism at play here with the LLM is completely different; the connection between two dog-inputs and the resulting game barely exists, if at all. Maybe the only signal is "some input was entered, therefore the user wants a game".
If you could have gotten the same result with any input, or with /dev/random, then effectively no useful information was encoded in the input. The initial prompt and the scaffolding do encode useful information, however, and are the ones doing the heavy lifting; the article admits as much.
Re: I'm helping my dog vibe code games
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody gives a damn about the dying of a trade. People don’t want their house foreclosed on when they lose their income, or their cancer to kill them when they lose their health insurance, to move an elderly parent into a cheap shitty old folks home because they can’t afford home health care, or not be able to pay for their kid to go on that school field trip. This would all be pretty fucking swell if the fundamental…
You act as if this is the first time in history technology has wiped out a trade and made people scramble to sort out their lives. No, this has been happening over and over again throughout history and at a rapidly accelerating pace since the industrial revolution. Why should we ask it to slow down on behalf of programmers, when it never did for anybody else? Don't pretend you didn't know this was a possibility when…
> You might have to downsize your life but humanity as a whole will be better off
This assumes that there will be other jobs to get. If AI replaces a large enough segment of office jobs then huge portions of the population will be unable to afford essentials like food and healthcare.