zlacker

>>gregor+(OP)
On the one hand, I would expect LLMs to be able to crank out such code when prompted by skilled engineers who also understand prompting these tools correctly. OAuth isn’t new, has tons of working examples to steal as training data from public projects, and in a variety of existing languages to suit most use cases or needs.

On the other hand, where I remain a skeptic is this constant banging-on that somehow this will translate into entirely new things - research, materials science, economies, inventions, etc - because that requires learning “in real time” from information sources you’re literally generating in that moment, not decades of Stack Overflow responses without context. That has been bandied about for years, with no evidence to show for it beyond specifically cherry-picked examples, often from highly-controlled environments.

I never doubted that, with competent engineers, these tools could be used to generate “new” code from past datasets. What I continue to doubt is the utility of these tools given their immense costs, both environmentally and socially.

>>stego-+6b
most engineering is glorified plumbing so as far as labour productivity goes, this should go a long way

>>waynen+0d
I doubt it, for the simple reason that literal plumbers still make excellent money because plumbing is ultimately bespoke output built on standards.

Everyone wants to automate the (proverbial) plumbing, until shit spews everywhere and there’s nobody to blame but yourself.