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

Google CEO says more than a quarter of the company's new code is created by AI

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 1001 posts

Re: Google CEO says more than a quarter of the company's new code is created by AI

#271

Post by atomic128 »

Izikiel43 wrote: post #264
atomic128 wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Empirical testing (for example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33293522 ) has established that the people on Hacker News tend to be junior in their skills. Understanding this fact can help you understand why certain opinions and reactions are more likely here. Surprisingly, the more skilled individuals tend to be found on Reddit (same testing performed there).

How is that thing testing? Is it expecting a specific solution or actually running the code? I tried some solutions and it complained anyways

The way the site works is explained in the first puzzle, "Hack This Site". TLDR, it builds and runs your code against a test suite. If your solutions weren't accepted, it's because they're wrong.

Re: Google CEO says more than a quarter of the company's new code is created by AI

#272

Post by game_the0ry »

IAmGraydon wrote: post #66
ultra_nick wrote: post #59

Why work at big businesses anymore? Let's just create more startups.

Risk appetite.

Not so sure nowadays. Given how often big tech lays off employees and the abundance of recently laid off tech talent, trying to start your own company sounds a lot more appealing than ever.

I consider myself risk-averse and even I am contemplating starting a small business in the event I get laid off.

Re: Google CEO says more than a quarter of the company's new code is created by AI

#273

Post by harry8 »

contravariant wrote: post #240
QuercusMax wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Java, 25% of the code is import statements and curly braces

In lisp about 50% of the code is just closing parentheses.

Heh, but it can't be that, no reason to think llms can count brackets needing a close any more than they can count words.

Re: Google CEO says more than a quarter of the company's new code is created by AI

#274

Post by chongli »

akoboldfrying wrote: post #209
chongli wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

we've decided we can't be bothered with traditional search Traditional search (at least on the web) is dying. The entire edifice is drowning under a rapidly rising tide of spam and scam sites. No one, including Google, knows what to do about it so we're punting on the whole project and hoping AI will swoop in like deus ex machina and save the day.

>The entire edifice is drowning under a rapidly rising tide of spam and scam sites. You make this claim with such confidence, but what is it based on? There have always been hordes of spam and scam websites. Can you point to anything that actually indicates that the ratio is now getting worse?

There have always been hordes of spam and scam websites. Can you point to anything that actually indicates that the ratio is now getting worse?

No, there haven't always been hordes of spam and scam websites. I remember the web of the 90s. When Google first arrived on the scene every site on the results page was a real site, not a spam/scam site.

Re: Google CEO says more than a quarter of the company's new code is created by AI

#276

Post by tonyedgecombe »

slibhb wrote: post #225
skrebbel wrote: post #127

To my experience, AIs can generate perfectly good code relatively easy things, the kind you might as well copy&paste from stackoverflow, and they'll very confidently generate subtly wrong code for anything that's non-trivial for an experienced programmer to write. How do people deal with this? I simply don't understand the value proposition. Does Google now have 25% subtly wrong code? Or do they have 25% trivial code…

Most programming is trivial. Lots of non-trivial programming tasks can be broken down into pure, trivial sections. Then, the non-trivial part becomes knowing how the entire system fits together. I've been using LLMs for about a month now. It's a nice productivity gain. You do have to read generated code and understand it. Another useful strategy is pasting a buggy function and ask for revisions. I think most programm…

>I think most programmers who claim that LLMs aren't useful are reacting emotionally.

I don't think that's true. Most programmers I speak to have been keen to try it out and reap some benefits.

The almost universal experience has been that it works for trivial problems, starts injecting mistakes for harder problems and goes completely off the rails for anything really difficult.

Re: Google CEO says more than a quarter of the company's new code is created by AI

#277

Post by Kiro »

rpcope1 wrote: post #186
skrebbel wrote: post #127

To my experience, AIs can generate perfectly good code relatively easy things, the kind you might as well copy&paste from stackoverflow, and they'll very confidently generate subtly wrong code for anything that's non-trivial for an experienced programmer to write. How do people deal with this? I simply don't understand the value proposition. Does Google now have 25% subtly wrong code? Or do they have 25% trivial code…

I don't get it either. People will say all sorts of strange stuff about how it writes the code for them or whatever, but even using the new Claude 3.5 Sonnet or whatever variant of GPT4, the moment I ask it anything that isn't the most basic done-to-death boilerplate, it generates stuff that's wrong, and often subtly wrong. If you're not at least pretty knowledgeable about exactly what it's generating, you'll be stuc…

Interesting that you believe your subjective experience outweighs the claims of all others who report successfully using LLMs for coding. Wouldn't a more charitable interpretation be that it doesn't fit the stuff you're doing?

Re: Google CEO says more than a quarter of the company's new code is created by AI

#278

Post by chongli »

masfuerte wrote: post #210
chongli wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

we've decided we can't be bothered with traditional search Traditional search (at least on the web) is dying. The entire edifice is drowning under a rapidly rising tide of spam and scam sites. No one, including Google, knows what to do about it so we're punting on the whole project and hoping AI will swoop in like deus ex machina and save the day.

Google results are not polluted with spam because Google doesn't know how to deal with it. Google results are polluted with spam because it is more profitable for Google. This is a conscious decision they made five years ago.

because it is more profitable for Google

Then why are DuckDuckGo results also (arguably even more so) polluted with spam/scam sites? I doubt DDG is making any profit from those sites since Google essentially owns the display ad business.

Re: Google CEO says more than a quarter of the company's new code is created by AI

#279

Post by hi_hi »

> More than a quarter of new code created at Google is generated by AI, said CEO Sundar Pichai...

How do they know this? At face value, it sounds like alot, but it only says "new code generated". Nothing about code making it into source control or production, or even which parts of googles vast business units.

For all we know, this could be the result of some internal poll "Tell us if you've been using Goose recently" or some marketing analytics on the Goose "Generate" button.

It's puff piece to put Google back in the lime light, and everyone is lapping it up.

Post reply on HN