511–520 of 1001 posts
This is a really pessimistic and shallow article. Who will prompt the AI for code? Manager? Also, you mentioned it gave wrong result at first. How did you know? Because you know how to code. As mentioned in other comment she should learn more about programming so she can become indispensible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He has that covered IMO. He talks at length about how he's not confident about his own career in the long run. So while he starts off talking about the AI doing one person's job, he makes it clear that he doesn't just think that about entry level workers.
He talked about his own fears: I want to hear Priya's opinion.
I'm still interested to hear her opinion as well but the point in the article would still be made, because if for some reason she had more mobility at the company, I could just imagine another scenario where the employee didn't.
The author leaves it open as to what she might to next, but makes it clear that at a minimum it would be a huge disappointment to be laid off due to AI after having gotten this job after all her efforts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've had a similar experience (but slightly different). The biggest innovation that ChatGPT has brought to me in my programming/workflow tasks is the comfort and ease in which it creates shell scripts. That's an area that's always been just past my comfort zone ("Create a shell script to solve this problem? Now I have two problems..."). But all of a sudden, I feel like a master at shell scripting! Things that have al…
This is currently one of the biggest impacts it's had on me: I no longer fear programming languages and DSLs that I'm not completely fluent in. I've use ChatGPT to confidently produce jq programs, and Bash, and zsh, and ffmpeg scripts, and AppleScript - all tech I've mostly avoided in the past because I hadn't climbed the learning curve far enough to be confident with them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've had a similar experience (but slightly different). The biggest innovation that ChatGPT has brought to me in my programming/workflow tasks is the comfort and ease in which it creates shell scripts. That's an area that's always been just past my comfort zone ("Create a shell script to solve this problem? Now I have two problems..."). But all of a sudden, I feel like a master at shell scripting! Things that have al…
Shell scripting and JavaScript are strengths, any kind of server-side language like Scala or C# it really falls apart quite quickly. I think that integrating into existing APIs is the Achilles' heel, GPT-4 doesn't seem to do any better here either. It makes me wonder if someday we might not get better results completely eschewing libraries altogether and letting the transformers generate literally everything--perhaps…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree completely. Additionally, people who hold this belief fail to realize that “I don’t want to work.” ACTUALLY means “I want others to work so I don’t have to.” For example, how are you going to eat? You are either going to grow, cultivate, and harvest your own food (i.e. work) or you’re expecting others to do that work for you. Oh, you say it can be “automated”? Well, who’s going to design, build, and maintain…
> people who hold this belief fail to realize that “I don’t want to work.” ACTUALLY means “I want others to work so I don’t have to.” No, it means "I am working to generate more wealth which flows predominantly to the owners of capital, who often do no work and sometimes have never done any work at all - can't we do something fairer than this?"
It always starts with this, then the next step is "ohh we can't really tax rich people and corporations ('owners of capital' that you speak of) since they have a lot of ways to move their capital out of our reach so let's just fleece the middle class instead!".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Define “fairly”
The grandparent comment does contain a definition: “A […] system that […] would make people welcome better AI because they could be confident it would make everyone wealthier” That would be a fair system regardless of the specifics of how it’s achieved.
Even when nearly everyone gets wealthier, if inequality grows, most people don't feel like it's fair.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Define “fairly”
The grandparent comment does contain a definition: “A […] system that […] would make people welcome better AI because they could be confident it would make everyone wealthier” That would be a fair system regardless of the specifics of how it’s achieved.
Funny thing - I've been using ChatGPT as a programming assistant. My experience with it is that the more knowledgeable I am at the domain, the more useful it is. It often generates code that won't compile or won't run correctly, but that sort of goes in the correct direction, enough that I can spot the blunders and refine my questions. Quite often I even learn a few new things when using it to explore libraries and f…
The big oversight here is that Priya does not want a job , what Priya wants is an income . The point of life is not working, the point of life is to enjoy it. We should strive to eliminate as many jobs as we possibly can, the less we have to work the better it is. To make this possible we need to find a way to a new system that doesn't directly link labour with income .
Jobs often make people feel useful. While many can be the happy unemployed person playing Counterstrike 24/7, many others need some sort of occupation for self-realization. This is actually a common problem, which can even became a major psychological issue, with people entering retirement. Maybe one day we can live in a world where machines are doing all the work and there are fulfilling hobbies for everybody, but I…
Bertrand Russell's In Praise of Idleness, 1932 seems increasingly true to me. The richest has kept a monopoly on idleness while tricking everyone else to see work as their purpose in life (to work to make it possible for the rich, idle, people to have nice lives without having to work).
"Modern methods of production have given us the possibility of ease and security for all; we have chosen instead to have overwork for some and starvation for others. Hitherto we have continued to be as energetic as we were before there were machines. In this we have been foolish, but there is no reason to go on being foolish for ever."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When we built the first airplane it could barely carry a single person and didn't go far... We are just barely touching digital general intelligence, and we're not even using API enabled versions that use tooling. And that's what we have today. Tell me, what is AI going to do tomorrow? >If you're worried about GPT taking over your job you just show your own lack of knowledge and experience. Oh, I'm glad you popped ou…
> Oh, I'm glad you popped out of the womb fully trained. As for the rest of us we have to go through a learning curve of gaining experience that takes years. You did pop out of the womb fully trained to use ChatGPT. Now you're left with the task of using it correctly and spotting its mistakes, which is a subject that by definition can only be done by humans. Right now ChatGPT is as much as its training data and it do…