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

Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

simonwillison.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 765 posts

Re: Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

#451

Post by OsrsNeedsf2P »

dumbfounder wrote: post #176
matsemann wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read that Meta is tasking all engineers with figuring out how they got owned by deepseek. Couldn't they just have asked an llm instead? After their claim of replacing all of us... I'm not too worried. If anything we're the last generation that knows how to debug and work through issues.

Yep, and we still need COBOL programmers too. Your job as a technologist is to keep up with technology and use the best tools for the job to increase efficiency. If you don’t do this you will be left behind or you will be relegated to an esoteric job no one wants.

> we still need COBOL programmers too

I briefly looked into this 10 years ago since people kept saying it. There is no demand for COBOL programmers, and the pay is far below industry average. [0]

[0] https://survey.stackoverflow.co/2024/work/#3-salary-and-expe...

Re: Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

#452

Post by throwu2728828 »

__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #446
throwu2728828 wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re-skill to what ? Everything is going to be upturned and/or solved by the time I could even do a pivot. There's no point at all now, I can only hold onto Christ.

If you believe that everything will be solved by the time you can pivot, what will we need jobs for anyway? I mean, the bottleneck justifying most scarcity is that we don't have adequate software to ask the robots to do the thing, so if that's a solved problem, which things will remain that still need doing? I don't personally think that's how it will go. AI will always need its hand held, if not due to a lack of cap…

I'm a student, so all pivots have a minimum delta of 2 years, which is something like a 100x on current capabilities on the seemingly steep s-curve we are on. That drives my "gloom" (in practice I've placed my hope in something eternal rather than a fickle thing like this)

Re: Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

#453

Post by kragen »

nkozyra wrote: post #289
dboreham wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've wondered about this too. The LLM could just write machine code. But now a human can't easily review it. But perhaps TDD makes that ok. But now the tests need to be written in a human readable language so they can be checked. Or do they? And if the LLM is always right why does the code need to be tested?

At a certain point I don't see why a human needs to be in the loop at all. But I suppose that's the most dystopian part of it all.

Maybe the human has the money.

Re: Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

#454

Post by nuancebydefault »

simonw wrote: post #7
blakesterz wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is DeepSeek really that big of a deal that everyone else should worry?

Yeah, it is definitely a big deal. I expect it will be a net positive: they proved that you can both train and run inference against powerful models for way less compute than people had previously expected - and they published enough details that other AI labs are already starting to replicate their results. I think this will mean cheaper, faster, and better models. This FAQ about it is very good: https://stratechery…

From the faq

'So are we close to AGI? It definitely seems like it. This also explains why Softbank (and whatever investors Masayoshi Son brings together) would provide the funding for OpenAI that Microsoft will not: the belief that we are reaching a takeoff point where there will in fact be real returns towards being first.'

Interesting.

Re: Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

#455

Post by rahimnathwani »

nyrikki wrote: post #366
mike31fr wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Noob question (I only learned how to use ollama a few days ago): what is the easiest way to run this DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B model that is not listed on ollama (or any other non-listed model) on my computer ?

ollama run deepseek-r1:32b They dropped the Qwen/Llama terms from the string https://ollama.com/library/deepseek-r1

Whenever they have an alias like this, they usually (always?) have a model with the same checksum but a more descriptive name, e.g. the checksum 38056bbcbb2d corresponds with both of these:

https://ollama.com/library/deepseek-r1:32b

https://ollama.com/library/deepseek-r1:32b-qwen-distill-q4_K...

I prefer to use the longer name, so I know which model I'm running. In this particular case, it's confusing that they grouped the qwen and llama fine tunes with R1, because they're not R1.

Re: Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

#456

Post by kragen »

svilen_dobrev wrote: post #402
gmt2027 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If AI increases the productivity of a single engineer between 10-100x over the next decade, there will be a seismic shift in the industry and the tech giants will not walk away unscathed. There are coordination costs to organising large amounts of labour. Costs that scale non-linearly as massive inefficiencies are introduced. This ability to scale, provide capital and defer profitability is a moat for big tech and th…

a (tile-placing) guy who was rebuilding my bathrooms, told this story: when he was greener, he happened to work with some old fart... who managed to work 10x faster than others, with this trick: put all the tiles on the wall with a diluted cement-glue very quick, then moving one tile forces most other tiles around to move as well.. so he managed to order all the tiles in very short time. As i never had the luxury of…

When I meta-meta-program, I sometimes waste a lot of time debugging.

Re: Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

#458

Post by ls_stats »

catigula wrote: post #397

Dario Amodei says software engineering is fully automated by 2027. You might have the 0.01% engineer left over, but that's it, the job is finished. I think people need to start considering strongly what kind of career they can re-skill to. https://darioamodei.com/machines-of-loving-grace

Cool, let's see if in 2027 Anthropic still exists.

Re: Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

#459

Post by girvo »

buyucu wrote: post #179
blakesterz wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is DeepSeek really that big of a deal that everyone else should worry?

There are two things. First, deepseek v3 and r1 are both amazing models. Second, the fact that deepseek was able to pull this off with such modest resources is an indication that there is no moat, and you might wake up tomorrow and find an even better model from a company you have never heard of.

Pull this off with such modest resources, including using ChatGPT itself for its RL inputs. It’s quite smart, and doesn’t disagree with your point that there is no moat per se, but without those frontier models and their outputs there is no V3, there is no R1.

Re: Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

#460

Post by throwu2728828 »

simonw wrote: post #88
fofoz wrote: post #77

When these models succeed in building a whole program and a whole system then the software industry that creates products and services will disappear. Any person and any organization will create from scratch the software they need perfectly customized to their needs and the AI system will evolve it over time. At most they will have to cooperate on communication protocols. In my opinion we are less than 5 years away f…

Any person who has the ability to break down a problem to the point that code can be written to solve it, and the ability to work with an LLM system to get that work done, and the ability to evaluate if the resulting code solves the problem. That's a mixture of software developer, program manager, product manager and QA engineer. I think that's what software developer roles will look like in the future: a slightly di…

I really want this to be true, but honestly it's really hard. What makes you think this won't be eaten too within the next year based on the current s-curve-if-not-exponential we are on?
Post reply on HN