AI sus talk. Kinda appropriate.
Andrej Karpathy's talk on the future of the industry
71–80 of 193 posts
Re: Andrej Karpathy's talk on the future of the industry
#72You’ve got “two bars” instead of “two rs” in strawberry
Re: Andrej Karpathy's talk on the future of the industry
#73I might be wrong, but it seems like some people are misinterpreting what is being said here. Software 3.0 isn't about using AI to write code. It's about using AI instead of code. So not Human -> AI -> Create Code -> Compile Code -> Code Runs -> The Magic Happens. Instead, it's Human -> AI -> The Magic Happens.
[dead]
Re: Andrej Karpathy's talk on the future of the industry
#74TL;DR: Karpathy says we’re in Software 3.0: big language models act like programmable building blocks where natural language is the new code. Don’t jump straight to fully autonomous “agents”—ship human-in-the-loop tools with an “autonomy slider,” tight generate-→verify loops, and clear GUIs. Cloud LLMs still win on cost, but on-device is coming. To future-proof, expose clean APIs and docs so these models (and coming…
[deleted]
Re: Andrej Karpathy's talk on the future of the industry
#75Is "Software 3.0" somehow related to "Web 3.0"?
No, they are totally unrelated. Web 3.0 is blockchain-backed web applications (rather than proprietary server-backed web applications, which is Web 2.0) and Software 3.0 is LLM-powered agents.
They are related in that they are pure marketing buzzwords to build enormous hype around a product, if not a dream.
Re: Andrej Karpathy's talk on the future of the industry
#76I might be wrong, but it seems like some people are misinterpreting what is being said here. Software 3.0 isn't about using AI to write code. It's about using AI instead of code. So not Human -> AI -> Create Code -> Compile Code -> Code Runs -> The Magic Happens. Instead, it's Human -> AI -> The Magic Happens.
This industry is so tiring
Re: Andrej Karpathy's talk on the future of the industry
#77Does it say anything about how this will affect wealth distribution?
Re: Andrej Karpathy's talk on the future of the industry
#78[deleted]
Re: Andrej Karpathy's talk on the future of the industry
#79>Software 2.0 are the weights which program neural networks. >I think it's a fundamental change, is that neural networks became programmable with large libraries... And in my mind, it's worth giving it the designation of a Software 3.0. I think it's a bit early to change your mind here. We love your 2.0, let's wait for some more time till th e dust settles so we can see clearly and up the revision number. In fact I'm…
Objectivity is lacking throughout the entire talk, not only in the thesis. But objectivity isn't very good for building hype.
Reminds me of Vitalik Buterin. I spent a lot of my starry-eyed youth reading his blog, and was hopeful that he was applying the learned-lessons from the early days of Bitcoin. Turned out he was fighting the wrong war though, and today Ethereum gets less lip service than your average shitcoin. The whole industry went up in flames, really.
Nerds are good at the sort of reassuring arithmetic that can make people confident in an idea or investment. But oftentimes that math misses the forest for the trees, and we're left betting the farm on a profoundly bad idea like Theranos or DogTV. Hey, I guess that's why it's called Venture Capital and not Recreation Investing.
Re: Andrej Karpathy's talk on the future of the industry
#80>Software 2.0 are the weights which program neural networks. >I think it's a fundamental change, is that neural networks became programmable with large libraries... And in my mind, it's worth giving it the designation of a Software 3.0. I think it's a bit early to change your mind here. We love your 2.0, let's wait for some more time till th e dust settles so we can see clearly and up the revision number. In fact I'm…
Objectivity is lacking throughout the entire talk, not only in the thesis. But objectivity isn't very good for building hype.
I'm curious why you think that? I thought the talk was pretty grounded. There was a lot of skepticism of using LLMs unbounded to write software and an insistence on using ground truth free from LLM hallucination. The main thesis, to me, seemed like "we need to write software that was designed with human-centric APIs and UI patterns to now use an LLM layer in front and that'll be a lot of opportunity for software engineers to come."
If anything it seemed like the middle ground between AI boosters and doomers.