A very relevant article from lesswrong, titled Cyborgism
https://www.lesswrong.com/s/f2YA4eGskeztcJsqT/p/bxt7uCiHam4Q...
Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
31–40 of 290 posts
Re: Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
#32Love the idea & spitballing ways to generalize to coding.. Thought experiment: as you write code, an LLM generates tests for it & the IDE runs those tests as you type, showing which ones are passing & failing, updating in real time. Imagine 10-100 tests that take The tests could appear in a separated panel next to your code, and pass/fail status in the gutter of that panel. As simple as red and green dots for tests t…
Humans writing the test first and LLM writing the code is much better than the reverse. And that is because tests are simply the “truth” and “intention” of the code as a contract. When you give up the work of deciding what the expected inputs and outputs of the code/program is you are no longer in the drivers seat.
>>Humans writing the test first and LLM writing the code is much better than the reverse.
Isn't that logic programming/Prolog?
You basically write the sequence of conditions(i.e tests in our lingo) that have to be true, and the compiler(now AI) generates code for your.
Perhaps there has to be a relook on how Logic programming can be done in the modern era to make this more seamless.
Re: Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
#33AI building complex visualisations for you on-the-fly seems like a great use-case.
For example, if you are debugging memory leaks in a specific code path, you could get AI to write a visualisation of all the memory allocations and frees under that code path to help you identify the problem. This opens up an interesting new direction where building visualisations to debug specific problems is probably becoming viable.
This idea reminds me of Jonathan Blow's recent talk at LambdaConf. In it, he shows a tool he made to visualise his programs in different ways to help with identifying potential problems. I could imagine AI being good at building these. The talk: https://youtu.be/IdpD5QIVOKQ?si=roTcCcHHMqCPzqSh&t=1108
Re: Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
#34Kind of a weird article because the computer systems that is "invisible" i.e. an integrated part of the flight control systems - is exactly what we have now. He's sort of arguing for .... computer software.
Like, we have HUDs - that's what a HUD is - it's a computer program.
Re: Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Humans writing the test first and LLM writing the code is much better than the reverse. And that is because tests are simply the “truth” and “intention” of the code as a contract. When you give up the work of deciding what the expected inputs and outputs of the code/program is you are no longer in the drivers seat.
> When you give up the work of deciding what the expected inputs and outputs of the code/program is you are no longer in the drivers seat. You don’t need to write tests for that, you need to write acceptance criteria.
As in, a developer would write something in e.g. gherkin, and AI would automatically create the matching unit tests and the production code?
That would be interesting. Of course, gherkin tends to just be transpiled into generated code that is customized for the particular test, so I'm not sure how AI can really abstract it away too much.
Re: Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
#36Concurrent posting from 5 hours ago (currently no comments): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44705018
Re: Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
#37Yes, this is a non-creepy way of applying AI.
Re: Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
> When you give up the work of deciding what the expected inputs and outputs of the code/program is you are no longer in the drivers seat. You don’t need to write tests for that, you need to write acceptance criteria.
As in, a developer would write something in e.g. gherkin, and AI would automatically create the matching unit tests and the production code? That would be interesting. Of course, gherkin tends to just be transpiled into generated code that is customized for the particular test, so I'm not sure how AI can really abstract it away too much.
All of this at the end reduces to a simple fact at the end of the discussion.
You need some of way of precisely telling AI what to do. As it turns out there is only that much you can do with text. Come to think of it, you can write a whole book about a scenery, and yet 100 people will imagine it quite differently. And still that actual photograph would be totally different compared to the imagination of all those 100 people.
As it turns out if you wish to describe something accurately enough, you have to write mathematical statements, in other words statements that reduce to true/false answers. We could skip to the end of the discussion here, and say you are better of either writing code directly or test cases.
This is just people revisiting logic programming all over again.
Re: Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
> When you give up the work of deciding what the expected inputs and outputs of the code/program is you are no longer in the drivers seat. You don’t need to write tests for that, you need to write acceptance criteria.
As in, a developer would write something in e.g. gherkin, and AI would automatically create the matching unit tests and the production code? That would be interesting. Of course, gherkin tends to just be transpiled into generated code that is customized for the particular test, so I'm not sure how AI can really abstract it away too much.
I’m talking higher level than that. Think about the acceptance criteria you would put in a user story. I’m specifically responding to this:
> When you give up the work of deciding what the expected inputs and outputs of the code/program is you are no longer in the drivers seat.
You don’t need to personally write code that mechanically iterates over every possible state to remain in the driver’s seat. You need to describe the acceptance criteria.
Re: Enough AI copilots, we need AI HUDs
#40Isn’t that what all the AI browsers like Comet, or the things like Cluey are trying to do