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

GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 742 posts

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#331

Post by EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK »

Nevermark wrote: post #273
enneff wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s the thing, isn’t it? The craft of programming in the small is one of being intimate with the details, thinking things through conscientiously. LLMs don’t do that.

Perhaps it should be prompted to then? Ask it to review its own code for any problems? Also identify typical and corner cases and generate tests? Question marks here because I have not used the tool. The size & depth of each accepted code step is still up to the developer slash prompter

That's presumably what o1-preview does? Iterates and checks the result. It takes much longer, but does indeed write slightly better code.

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#332

Post by zeroonetwothree »

logicchains wrote: post #197
mensetmanusman wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A trillion dimensional stochastic parrot is still a stochastic parrot. If these systems showed understanding we would notice. No one is denying that this form of intelligence is useful.

I don't know how you can say they lack understanding of the world when in pretty much any standardised test designed to measure human intelligence they perform better than the average human. They only thing that don't understand is touch because they're not trained on that, but they can already understand audio and video.

An answer key would outperform the average human but it isn’t intelligent. Tests designed for humans are not appropriate to judge non humans.

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#333

Post by bongodongobob »

tanseydavid wrote: post #271
bob1029 wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the subtle errors that are really difficult to navigate. I got burned for about 40 hours on a conditional being backward in the middle of an otherwise flawless method. The apparent speed up is mostly a deception. It definitely helps with rough outlines and approaches. But, the faster you go, the less you will notice the fine details, and the more assumptions you will accumulate before realizing the fundamental e…

>> The apparent speed up is mostly a deception. When I am able ask a very simple question of an LLM which then prevents me having to context-switch to answer the same simple question myself; this is a big time saver for me but hard-to-quantify. Anything that reduces my cognitive load when the pressure is on is a blessing on some level.

Cognitive load is something people always leave out. I can fuckin code drunk with these things. Or just increase stamina to push farther than I would writing every single line.

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#335

Post by Aeolun »

thih9 wrote: post #221

I use cursor and its tab completion; while what it can do is mind blowing, in practice I’m not noticing a productivity boost. I find that ai can help significantly with doing plumbing, but it has no problems with connecting the pipes wrong. I need to double and triple check the updated code - or fix the resulting errors when I don’t do that. So: boilerplate and outer app layers, yes; architecture and core libraries,…

> in practice I’m not noticing a productivity boost

I am. Can suddenly do in a weekend what would have taken a week.

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#336

Post by bongodongobob »

nrclark wrote: post #283
Nevermark wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps it should be prompted to then? Ask it to review its own code for any problems? Also identify typical and corner cases and generate tests? Question marks here because I have not used the tool. The size & depth of each accepted code step is still up to the developer slash prompter

I use Chatgpt for coding / API questions pretty frequently. It's bad at writing code with any kind of non-trivial design complexity. There have been a bunch of times where I've asked it to write me a snippet of code, and it cheerfully gave me back something that doesn't work for one reason or another. Hallucinated methods are common. Then I ask it to check its code, and it'll find the error and give me back code with…

Honestly I find that when GPT starts to lose the plot it's a good time to refactor and then keep on moving. "Break this into separate headers or modules and give me some YAML like markup with function names, return type, etc for each file." Or just use stubs instead of dumping every line of code in.

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#337

Post by EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK »

gonab wrote: post #55
dartos wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, Claude consistently impresses me. A commenter on another thread mentioned it but it’s very similar to how search felt in the early 2000s. I ask it a question and get my answer. Sometimes it’s a little (or a lot) wrong or outdated, but at least I get something to tinker with.

Conversely I feel that the experience of searching has been degraded by a lot since 2016/17. My these is that, at this time, online spam increased by an order of magnitude

It's getting ridiculous. Half of the time now when I ask AI to search some information for me, it finds and summarizes some very long article obviously written by AI, and lacking any useful information.

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#338

Post by bongodongobob »

tomrod wrote: post #297
Nevermark wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps it should be prompted to then? Ask it to review its own code for any problems? Also identify typical and corner cases and generate tests? Question marks here because I have not used the tool. The size & depth of each accepted code step is still up to the developer slash prompter

How long are you willing to iterate to get things right?

If it takes almost no cognitive energy, quite a while. Even if it's a little slower than what I can do, I don't care because I didn't have to focus deeply on it and have plenty of energy left to keep on pushing.

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#339

Post by bongodongobob »

0xFACEFEED wrote: post #329
ianbutler wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm actually very curious why AI use is such a bi-modal experience. I've used AI to move multi thousand line codebases between languages. I've created new apps from scratch with it. My theory is the willingness to baby sit and the modality. I'm perfectly fine telling the tool I use its errors and working side by side with it like it was another person. At the end of the day it can belt out lines of code faster than I…

As a programmer of over 20 years - this is terrifying. I'm willing to accept that I just have "get off my lawn" syndrome or something. But the idea of letting an LLM write/move large swaths of code seems so incredibly irresponsible. Whenever I sit down to write some code, be it a large implementation or a small function, I think about what other people (or future versions of myself) will struggle with when interactin…

You. Can. Write. Tests.

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#340

Post by rqmedes »

zeroonetwothree wrote: post #321
tensor wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except actual studies objectively show efficiency gains, more with junior devs, which make sense. So no, it's not a "deception" but it is often overstated in popular media.

Studies have limitations, in particular they test artificial and narrowly-scoped problems that are quite different from real world work.

I find the opposite, the more senior the more value they offer as you know how to ask the right questions, how to vary the questions and try different tact’s and also observe errors or mistakes
Post reply on HN