Don't you mean extinct?
51–60 of 145 posts
Re: Don't you mean extinct?
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, he is correct. LLMs have much larger working memories for the kind of details you work with in programming tasks. You are at an objective cognitive deficit by not taking advantage of this. Everybody knows what he means by left behind. When you program, you do so with a goal in mind, and you will not be able to reach that goal as quickly without LLMs. You will be outcompeted by those who use them, and this means t…
Exactly, it's pretty obvious, and definitely as you sail, not aggressive (someone melts a little too easily) The comment was naive to the point of denial. This is the future. Adapt or die.
The "or die" part betrays insecurity and weakness. You need to scare prople into using it rihht now, because of some perceived threat.
Re: Don't you mean extinct?
#53The film industry loves cgi because none of the digital vfx houses are unionized and they can treat the artists like crap. It severely devalued a ton of skilled labor around miniature and set design.
Now, after 20 years of hard swing into cgi, people are starting to recognize just how much better movies from the practical era looked, and there is a push back towards it. Project Hail Mary was predominantly practical effects, for example. Stop motion animation is coming back, and theres a push back into hand cell animation.
Re: Don't you mean extinct?
#54Did Tippett enjoy working on the Dinosaur Input Device as much as he did with his go-motion technique? I see employability being discussed far more often than joy. If your motivation was selling as many clothes as possible, then the industrial textile revolution was miraculous. If you enjoyed knitting threads together, it was the crushing victory of mediocrity.
You just won't be able to get a job doing it. It will be a hobby, not a way to make a living.
Re: Don't you mean extinct?
#55> I asked an LLM to write a Levenshtein distance function instead of adding a dependency to my project. Which you likely failed to review thoroughly, so may be subtly wrong.
Re: Don't you mean extinct?
#56I mostly like this article but > Those who refuse to use an LLM will fall behind because they won't be able to produce as much Seems like a silly and needlessly aggressive take. Fall behind what? Able to produce "as much" what? I've never been evaluated on volume in my life. Nor have co workers who were severely "behind" ever feared for their jobs.
Those times are passing and you'll sooner or later meet with new reality.
People on HN will drop what they think is their trump card. Ie The computer spitting out incorrect info. However, I've worked in banking finance where data was wrong and people in charge just shrugged when I showed them and said something like, accounting will catch it. And here's the worst thing. They were right.
Re: Don't you mean extinct?
#57I mostly like this article but > Those who refuse to use an LLM will fall behind because they won't be able to produce as much Seems like a silly and needlessly aggressive take. Fall behind what? Able to produce "as much" what? I've never been evaluated on volume in my life. Nor have co workers who were severely "behind" ever feared for their jobs.
Re: Don't you mean extinct?
#58I mostly like this article but > Those who refuse to use an LLM will fall behind because they won't be able to produce as much Seems like a silly and needlessly aggressive take. Fall behind what? Able to produce "as much" what? I've never been evaluated on volume in my life. Nor have co workers who were severely "behind" ever feared for their jobs.
No, he is correct. LLMs have much larger working memories for the kind of details you work with in programming tasks. You are at an objective cognitive deficit by not taking advantage of this. Everybody knows what he means by left behind. When you program, you do so with a goal in mind, and you will not be able to reach that goal as quickly without LLMs. You will be outcompeted by those who use them, and this means t…
Re: Don't you mean extinct?
#59I mostly like this article but > Those who refuse to use an LLM will fall behind because they won't be able to produce as much Seems like a silly and needlessly aggressive take. Fall behind what? Able to produce "as much" what? I've never been evaluated on volume in my life. Nor have co workers who were severely "behind" ever feared for their jobs.
127. A technological advance that appears not to threaten freedom often turns out to threaten it very seriously later on. For example, consider motorized transport. A walking man formerly could go where he pleased, go at his own pace without observing any traffic regulations, and was independent of technological support-systems. When motor vehicles were introduced they appeared to increase man’s freedom. They took no…
One can, obviously, romanticize the times of cave live, that's fine with me, but I doubt that would be a common choice.
Re: Don't you mean extinct?
#60I mostly like this article but > Those who refuse to use an LLM will fall behind because they won't be able to produce as much Seems like a silly and needlessly aggressive take. Fall behind what? Able to produce "as much" what? I've never been evaluated on volume in my life. Nor have co workers who were severely "behind" ever feared for their jobs.
We have general expectations on the velocity an engineer should be able to work at. If it took someone 5 weeks to deliver the exact same feature another engineer could deliver in 1 week, that would be considered "falling behind" at most places. Would you disagree? The notion of falling behind because you refuse to adopt an advance in the field seems both uncontroversial and not aggressive at all to me.