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

The intent paradox of AI generated code

feruchemy.bearblog.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–18 of 18 posts

Re: The intent paradox of AI generated code

#11

Post by dartos »

nthingtohide wrote: post #8
dartos wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is there a physical law which will limit AI progress? Probably the same law that limits compute power wrt to space and energy. Look at how much energy goes into training GPT 4.5 vs it’s improvements (on our own potentially bunk benchmarks, granted) Also like… literally nothing in the universe advances exponentially forever. Whether or not any of that is valid, I’d like an answer to my question. Is the only reason y…

If AI is the general purpose pattern recognition algorithm and real world has patterns then as long as data i.e. real world has juice, AI will do better. Recursive self improvement is included in the domain. The only constraint will be how long it takes to gather feedback from the real world when AI does experiments.

I’m sorry, but I didn’t understand what you meant on and after the word “juice”

I’m not sure any of that was relevant to what I was saying.

And you still didn’t answer my question.

Re: The intent paradox of AI generated code

#12

Post by nthingtohide »

stuckinhell wrote: post #7
nthingtohide wrote: post #2

Wrt to premature optimization, in future, AI will write the most optimized for every general and obscure cases out of the box eking out every last blood of performance from any kind of hardware. This will usher in the era of "hypermature optimization".

Already seeing this happen in salesforce implementation at work. It's pretty crazy how many problems we have are people trying to solve already solved problems

Can you share one or two anecdotes? I am curious.

Re: The intent paradox of AI generated code

#13

Post by nthingtohide »

dartos wrote: post #11
nthingtohide wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If AI is the general purpose pattern recognition algorithm and real world has patterns then as long as data i.e. real world has juice, AI will do better. Recursive self improvement is included in the domain. The only constraint will be how long it takes to gather feedback from the real world when AI does experiments.

I’m sorry, but I didn’t understand what you meant on and after the word “juice” I’m not sure any of that was relevant to what I was saying. And you still didn’t answer my question.

I am only doubtful about the exponential part. I am hopeful that yes all fields will ultimately subsumed by AI.

Re: The intent paradox of AI generated code

#14

Post by dartos »

nthingtohide wrote: post #13
dartos wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sorry, but I didn’t understand what you meant on and after the word “juice” I’m not sure any of that was relevant to what I was saying. And you still didn’t answer my question.

I am only doubtful about the exponential part. I am hopeful that yes all fields will ultimately subsumed by AI.

I believe exponential (as opposed to logarithmic) advancement would be needed for that to happen.

If the improvement curve is linear, it would be prohibitively expensive as and if logarithmic, it’d be impossible.

Re: The intent paradox of AI generated code

#15

Post by nthingtohide »

williamcotton wrote: post #9

What if instead of static code our programs of the future are written/rewritten on the fly? Imagine a simple todo application. Instead of a conditional filter on completed items the code itself changes to always and only return completed items upon request, spoken or otherwise.

Ephemeral customised personalized apps are the future. Imagine you have to plan for wedding or big event. Just build an app for it. The app will fit like glove to your hand.

Re: The intent paradox of AI generated code

#16

Post by bibryam »

williamcotton wrote: post #9

What if instead of static code our programs of the future are written/rewritten on the fly? Imagine a simple todo application. Instead of a conditional filter on completed items the code itself changes to always and only return completed items upon request, spoken or otherwise.

AI already does that. Send a question to chatgpt that requires analytics, chatgpt will write a python code, execute it, and return you the result.

Re: The intent paradox of AI generated code

#17

Post by nthingtohide »

dartos wrote: post #14
nthingtohide wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am only doubtful about the exponential part. I am hopeful that yes all fields will ultimately subsumed by AI.

I believe exponential (as opposed to logarithmic) advancement would be needed for that to happen. If the improvement curve is linear, it would be prohibitively expensive as and if logarithmic, it’d be impossible.

Another point in your favour is the problem space itself will become exponentially large. Imagine getting a requirement to synthesize a material with 40 properties rather than 1 or 2.

Re: The intent paradox of AI generated code

#18

Post by stuckinhell »

nthingtohide wrote: post #12
stuckinhell wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Already seeing this happen in salesforce implementation at work. It's pretty crazy how many problems we have are people trying to solve already solved problems

Can you share one or two anecdotes? I am curious.

I need to be vague, because lets just say CRUD apps are nearly a solved problem even in some very technical fields.

Not much changes between billing models, hr models, even custom financial models aren't THAT custom these days.

Consolidation of best practices across diverse technical fields has happened rapidly fast in the last 10 years.

So the AI catches things, business managers, project managers, business analysts, and programmers miss during initial project scoping and design.

Post reply on HN