Comment on OpenAI's reported 'superintelligence' breakthrough is so big it nearly destroyed the company, and ChatGPT

• FlyingSquid@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  If your code doesn’t work because you rely entirely on an AI to do it, you don’t have a business you can run unless you want to go back to paper and pencil.

  source

  • jeena@jemmy.jeena.net ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    If your code doesn’t work because you rely on humans understanding it, you don’t have a business you can run. We already are there where humans have no idea why the computer does this or that decision because it’s so complex especially with all the machine learning and complex training data, etc. let’s not pretend it will get less complex with time.

    source

    • FlyingSquid@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      So your argument is that people will rely on AI entirely without making any redundancies, unlike now where they have more than one human so they can check for these issues because humans make coding errors?

      source

      • jeena@jemmy.jeena.net ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        My argument is that already today no human is able to and checks it when it comes to decision making models like for example if the car should go left or right around a obstacle. And over time we will have less straight forward classical programming doing decisions and more and more models doing decisions with hundreds or thousands of sensor inputs.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • Enkers@sh.itjust.works ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        I kinda agree with them. Currently coding already is an abstraction. The average developer has very little idea what machine code their compiler actually produces, and for the most part they don’t need to care about this. Feeding an AI a specification is just a higher level of abstraction.

        For now, we’ll need people to check that AI produces code that does what we expect, but I believe at some point well mostly take it for granted that they just do.

        source