Comment on I Went All-In on AI. The MIT Study Is Right.
raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 4 weeks agoWhile I appreciate your differentiated opinion, I strongly disagree. As long as there is no actual AI involved (and considering that humanity is dumb enough to throw hundreds of billions at a gigantic parrot, I doubt we would stand a chance to develop true AI, even if it was possible to create), the output has no reasoning behind it.
- it violates licenses and denies authorship and - if everyone was indeed equal before the law, this alone would disqualify the code output from such a model because it’s simply illegal to use code in violation of license restrictions & stripped of licensing / authorship information
- there is no point. Developing code is 95-99% solving the problem in your mind, and 1-5% actual code writing. You can’t have an algorithm do the writing for you and then skip on the thinking part. And if you do the thinking part anyways, you have gained nothing.
A good developer has zero need for non-deterministic tools.
As for potential use in brainstorming ideas / looking at potential solutions: that’s what the usenet was good for, before those very corporations fucked it up for everyone, who are now force-feeding everyone the snake oil that they pretend to have any semblance of intelligence.
keegomatic@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Not a problem if you believe all code should be free. Being cheeky but this has nothing to do with code quality, despite being true
This argument can be used equally well in favor of AI assistance, and it’s already covered by my previous reply
It’s deterministic
This is not what a “good developer” uses it for
raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
I can’t keep you from doing what you want, but I will continue to view software developers using LLMs as script kiddies playing with fire.