zlacker

>>orph+(OP)
I have a few questions about copilot. I haven’t gotten a chance to use it yet.

Is it irrational that this makes me a little anxious about job security over the longterm? Idk why but this was my initial reaction when learning about this.

Given the scenario where copilot and its likes becomes used in a widespread manner. Can it be argued that this might improve productivity but stifle innovation?

Im pretty early in my career but the rate things are capable of changing soon doesn’t sit too well with me.

>>wara23+UC
It's reasonable to worry.

- Copilot is qualitatively different from the kinds of automation of programming we've seen before.

- It's barely version 1.0 of this kind of thing. Deep learning has been advancing incredibly for a decade and doesn't seem to be slowing down. Researchers also work on things like mathematical problem-solving, which would tie in to "real work" and not just the boilerplate.

- In past examples of AI going from subhuman to superhuman, e.g. chess and go, the practitioners did not expect to be overtaken just a few years after it had not even felt like real competition. You'd read quotes from them about the ineffability of human thought.

What to do personally, I don't know. Stay flexible?

>>abeced+GL
There is a world of difference between what Copilot does and what an engineer does. Imagine reading a design document for a feature and implementing that on a large, years-old codebase, ie, what many engineers do on a daily basis. Copilot isn't even 1 millionth of the way to even beginning to solve that problem, it would require human-level AGI with the capability of understanding human cultural and institutional context: something categorically different than anything happening in deep learning.