zlacker

I was initially impressed and blown away when it could output code and fix mistakes. But the first time I tried to use it for actual work, I fed it some simple stuff and I even had the pseudo code as comments already - all it had to do is to implement it. It made tons of mistakes and trying to correct it felt like way more effort than just implementing it myself. Then that piece of code got much more complex, and I think there's no way this thing is even close to outputting something like that, unless it has seen it already. And that was ChatGPT, I have observed Copilot to be even worse.

Yes, I'm aware though it may get better but we actually don't know that yet. What if it's way harder to go from outputting junior level code with tons of mistakes to error-free complex code, than it is to go from no capability to write code to junior level code with tons of mistakes? What if it's the difference between word prediction algorithm and actual human-level intelligence?

There may be a big decrease in demand, because a lot of apps are quite simple. A lot of software out there are "template apps", stuff that can theoretically be produced by a low code app, will be eventually produced by a low code app, AI or not. When it comes to novel and complex things, I think it's not unreasonable to consider that the next 10 - 20 years will still see plenty demand for good developers.

>>mckrav+(OP)
Considering that OpenAI started instruction following alignment a month ago, with 1k workers, to do engineering tasks, coding might be solved now.

>>startu+Ke1
I have just decided to give it another try on a very straightforward thing. I have asked it to get me a Rust function that uses a headless browser to get the HTML of a fully loaded webpage.

ChatGPT:

let screenshot = tab.capture_screenshot(ScreenshotFormat::PNG, None, true).await?;

let html = String::from_utf8(screenshot).unwrap();

>[...] Once the page is fully loaded, the function captures a screenshot of the page using tab.capture_screenshot(), converts the screenshot to a string using String::from_utf8(), and then returns the string as the HTML content of the page.

Of course, it admits to the mistake (sort of, it still does not get):

> You are correct, taking a screenshot and converting it to text may not always be the best approach to extract the HTML content from a webpage.

It's hilarious.