zlacker

>>laiysb+(OP)
With how stochastic the process is it makes it basically unusable for any large scale task. What's the plan? To roll the dice until the answer pops up? That would be maybe viable if there was a way to automatically evaluate it 100% but with a human in the loop required it becomes untenable.

>>margor+72
The plan is to improve AI agents from their current ~intern level to a level of a good engineer.

>>eterev+J2
Seems like that is taking a very long time, on top of some very grandiose promises being delivered today.

>>ethano+l3
I look back over the past 2-3 years and am pretty amazed with how quick change and progress have been made. The promises are indeed large but the speed of progress has been fast. Not defending the promise but “taking a very long time” does not seem to be an accurate representation.

>>infect+K5
> The promises are indeed large but the speed of progress has been fast

And at the same time, absurdly slow? ChatGPT is almost 3 years old and pretty much AI has still no positive economic impact.

>>owebma+b6
There is the huge blind spot where tech workers think LLMs are being made primarily to either assist them or replace them.

Nobody seems to consider that LLMs are democratizing programming, and allowing regular people to build programs that make their work more efficient. I can tell you that at my old school manufacturing company, where we have no programmers and no tech workers, LLMs have been a boon for creating automation to bridge gaps and even to forgo paid software solutions.

This is where the change LLMs will bring will come from. Not from helping an expert dev write boilerplate 30% faster.