Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)Q

qqq

@ qqq @lemmy.world

Posts
1
Comments
187
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • My enthusiasm for tech is basically gone.

    Jump

  • You’re suggesting that we replace THEM with an agent.

    I am not suggesting we replace anyone, least of all the open source community, so let's not put words in my mouth

    I think the current code I see being generated is generally “good enough”. I’m not comparing it to perfect: I’m comparing it to people.

    If this were true, then open source projects would have much less of an issue with pull requests from sloperators.

    This doesn't follow to me. A good tool in the hand of a crappy user doesn't suddenly make good output. I specifically said that LLMs write good code in a specific setting. Clearly random person generating thousands of lines at a time for a project they don't understand isn't that setting.

    You seem to be very focused on crappy code generated by people that don't know what they're doing, the technology isn't good enough for that, so yes, it won't work in that setting, I agree.

  • My enthusiasm for tech is basically gone.

    Jump

  • I'd push back on your point here with a few things:

    The primary one being: the code doesn't need to be perfect or even above average -- average is perfectly fine. The idea here is comparing the AI to a human, not to perfection. I see this constantly with AI and I find it a bit disingenuous.

    I do truly believe what I said above will be possible within my career (I'm in my mid 30s), but it's not really what I'm worried about right now. I think the current code I see being generated is generally "good enough". I'm not comparing it to perfect: I'm comparing it to people.

    I read a comment once that still rings true - “Hallucinations” are a misnomer. Everything an LLM puts out is a hallucination; it’s just that a lot of the time, it happens to be accurate. Eliminating that last percentage of inaccurate hallucinations is going to be nearly impossible.

    I don't see any reason you have to remove all hallucinations to get a good tool for autonomous development: humans aren't perfect either. We compensate for that with processes and checking each others work, but plenty still falls through the cracks.

    LLMs also have no understanding of context outside the immediate. Satire is completely opaque to them. Sarcasm is lost on them, by and large. And they have no way to differentiate between good and bad output. Or good and bad input, for that matter. Joke pseudocode is just as valid in their training corpus as dire warnings about insecure code.

    Have you seen output in which satirical code is actually included? I'm well aware of things like https://www.anthropic.com/research/small-samples-poison and the potential here. And do you not believe that either (a) these types of trivial issues would be caught by a person whose job was just to audit output or even (b) this type of issue could be caught by specially trained domain limited AIs designed to check output?

  • My enthusiasm for tech is basically gone.

    Jump

  • To your point then: what are your thoughts on this project? https://github.com/anthropics/claudes-c-compiler I'm not particularly interested in this use case right now but it seems more in line with what you're interested in.

    I think it shows a lot of limitations but also a lot of potential. I don't personally think the AI needs to get the code perfect on the first go -- it has to be compared to humans and we definitely don't do that.

    I really really dislike the way it’s being sold as a solution for things it’s in no way a solution for.

    Yes, of course. I think it's important to look passed the blowhards and think about what it's actually doing: that is the perspective I'm trying to talk about this from.

  • My enthusiasm for tech is basically gone.

    Jump

  • I didn't say "trust me bro" and showing Claude submissions is sufficient for analyzing code in the context I believe it is good: one file at a time and one task at a time. This is also the same realm that a human is good. You are welcome to look at the project as a whole to determine the "project quality" as well: it's open source. But I'm not here to argue: I believe this tech that is barely in its infancy is already quite good and going to get better, and I'm already considering what it will do to my life. If you don't, that's fine.

    I'll add here that I find it very frustrating to talk about these "AI agents" and their code output, because it's something we're all close to and spent a lot of time learning. The concept of "a machine" getting "better than us" so quickly, with the background context of an industry that is chomping at the bit to replace humans makes these discussions inherently difficult and really emotional. I feel genuine sadness when I think about it. If the world were different we'd probably all be stoked. I don't want the AI to be better than me, and I currently don't believe it is, but I think:

    1. My belief doesn't stop the market. People do believe that it is better than me or at least good enough. This has a real effect on my life and the lives of people I know.
    2. I don't see any fundamental reason it won't get better at development. Part of the reason it struggles with large projects is context: that doesn't sound like a fundamental engineering constraint to me, it sounds like a memory constraint. Specialization will also make it better and better I assume.
    3. Even if it is never better than me, it will certainly be more efficient and eventually the market will consider my time better spent correcting its output or guiding it, removing the fun part of the work in my mind.

    I don't think my job is currently on the chopping block today: I don't do development I do security work. But I do think it will either be on the chopping block or fundamentally change sooner than I'm comfortable with.

  • My enthusiasm for tech is basically gone.

    Jump

  • My goal is to pay off my house and then accept a lower salary as a trade off for more fulfilling work.

  • My enthusiasm for tech is basically gone.

    Jump

  • Claude commits to GitHub with the same name no matter who uses it. You can see every single line of open source code it has written (for GitHub only of course): https://github.com/search?q=author%3Aclaude&type=commits&s=author-date&o=desc. Look around as you please, most of it is just fine.

    People that I know to be good developers have also shared their experiences with it and say yes, it has written good code for them. I've personally used ChatGPT to generate very mundane tasks and the code it output was more than adequate.

    It introduces security bugs and subtle bugs at probably the same rate as a human (I have no "citation" there, just what I've seen). It needs to be "driven" by a human, yes, but it's not clear for how long it will need to be, and even if it always does, personally I don't want my job to be to "drive an AI".

  • My enthusiasm for tech is basically gone.

    Jump

  • Right, but I think we're kidding ourselves if we don't think it's going to get better. I have no doubt it will be able to magically generate a new Linux kernel.

  • My enthusiasm for tech is basically gone.

    Jump

  • I have to track my time in 3 different system

    Which circle of hell is this?

  • My enthusiasm for tech is basically gone.

    Jump

  • I've been working in tech for about 10 years now as well, and I'm also just feeling tired. I'm a bit sad, because I like my job. I didn't study computer science or anything in college; I just got work in security because I enjoyed it. It's sad pretty much knowing it won't be the same. I don't really want to offload a lot of the work to an AI in the future.

    I've been getting more into learning to weld and work with wood. In the next few years I'll probably consider starting a small custom furniture company.

    I feel like this part of the conversation is drowned by the AI hype train and the AI hate train. The part where real people are seeing the real effects of a technology that is actually good, and is likely going to get better, and will have the potential for significant social damage to a large part of the middle class.

  • My enthusiasm for tech is basically gone.

    Jump

  • It really doesn't suck at them. AI writes great code; I think we just want it to suck. It can't magically generate a new Linux kernel, but the small tasks I've seen it do have all been mostly above average. (I have also seen some complete garbage, yes, mostly above average)

  • The three archetypes

    Jump

  • I think his ability to see the problems in the way he acted, and then actually act on it, even when a bunch of people encouraged it, is impressive.

  • VPN only with ID check in UK?

    Jump

  • I'd take it a step further and say it's not even a use of a VPN at all. If you want to browse the web anonymously a VPN doesn't provide that guarantee: it only affects your source IP, which most services probably understand is unreliable for tracking purposes anyway.

    Even for changing your IP to aid in being anonymous on the web, TOR is the network layer tool to use, because you will have a much wider range of source IPs than the single one you'll get from the VPN, but there is still so much work to do to "browse the web anonymously".

    I think a lot of people don't understand VPNs. They're great privacy tools if you don't trust the local network or your ISP, as all traffic is typically encrypted and headed for the same server, but being anonymous on the web is way more involved because you are much more than your IP address.

    Btw I'm not replying here thinking you don't understand all that; just expanding on the conversation

  • Keep Android Open

    Jump

  • This isn't about the play store: it's about installing anything at all. I couldn't care less if AI slop is on the play store though to answer your question

  • Keep Android Open

    Jump

  • These questions are always asked in the opposite direction. What's right with making devs verify? What does it gain an end user?

  • GUIs

    Jump

  • Yea that made me laugh; I just updated my resume from LaTeX to typst a few months ago actually

  • Why ‘deleted’ doesn’t mean gone: How police recovered Nancy Guthrie’s doorbell footage

    Jump

  • I wouldn't be surprised if this is actually what happened here.. tech companies in general don't delete data if they can avoid it. I worked for companies that would just set deleted = 1 in the DB on delete calls. Google has more ability than anyone else to put that data to use

  • Taste the flavor

    Jump

  • The effect they're talking about comes from the peppercorns, not the peppers. You heat them slightly in a pan and then grind them in a mortar and pestle. I run them through a fine strainer after that, but I dunno if you have to.

  • No comment

    Jump

  • What I think though is that it’s particularly hard on Linux to fix programs, especially if you are not a developer (which is always the perspective I try to see things from). Most notable architectural difference here between f.e. Windows and Linux would be how you’re able to simply throw a library into the same folder as the executable on Windows for it to use it (an action every common user can do and fully understand). On Linux you hypothetically can work with LD_PRELOAD, but (assuming someone already wrote a tutorial and points to the file for you to grab) even that already requires more knowledge about some system concepts.

    You're not even realizing how advanced of a user on Windows you have to be to realize that putting a DLL in the correct directory will make that the library used by the program running from that directory. Most users won't even know what a DLL is. Also I work in security professionally and I've used this fun little fact to get remote code execution multiple times, so I don't see how it's a good thing, especially when you consider that Linux's primary use case is servers. You can do the exact same thing on Linux, as you said, it's just opt in behavior. If you are knowledgeable enough to know what a DLL is and what effects placing one in a given folder have, you're knowledgeable enough to know what a shared library is and how to open a text editor and type LD_LOAD_PATH or LD_PRELOAD. I don't buy this argument at all.

    Linux Desktop is predominantly a volunteer project. It is not backed by millions of dollars and devs from major corporations like the kernel or base system. It is backed by people who are doing way too much work for free. They likely care about accessibility and people using their project, but they also care about the myriad of other issues that they face for the other 90+% of their user base. Is that hugely unfortunate? Yes, it sucks. I wish there was money invested in Linux as a desktop platform, but compared to macOS and Windows it's fair to say there is a rounding error towards $0.

  • No comment

    Jump

  • This is not semantics at all. You earlier say that Linux not having a stable ABI is the cause of a ton of problems.

    This shit is the exact reason Linux doesn’t just have ridiculously bad backwards compatibility but has also alienated literally everyone who isn’t a developer, and why the most stable ABI on Linux is god damn Win32 through Wine.

    Android doesn't make any more Linux ABI guarantees than anyone else: because it's using the Linux kernel. I can easily compile a program targeting a generic aarch64 with a static musl C and run the binary on Android. So no, it isn't semantics, it is good proof that you're not correct in claiming that Linux ABI stability is terrible. Maybe you're using the term "Linux ABI" more loosely than everyone else, but that's not "just semantics", the Linux ABI is a well defined concept and the parts of it that are stable are well defined.

    Life is Strange: Before the Storm shipped with native Linux support back in 2017. That was a different era - glibc 2.26 was current, and some developers made the unfortunate choice of linking against internal, undocumented glibc symbols.

    The very first line of your blog post that you shared. That has nothing do do with Linux ABI stability, or honestly even glibc ABI stability, if you're going to use symbols that are explicitly internal you can't get annoyed when they change..? That's a terrible example.

    Adobe still shipped CS6 until 2017, so it's 9 years old. That's not particularly ancient, and it's backed by.. well Adobe. They have a bit of money. [EDIT: https://helpx.adobe.com/creative-suite/kb/cs6-install-instructions.html actually it's still available on their site so.. I wouldn't expect any issues]

    Did you run Total Annihilation through Steam? I found this link https://steamcommunity.com/app/298030/discussions/0/1353742967805047388/ and people even had to modify things that way. It's very impressive that it runs at all and yes, Windows is most definitely the king of backwards compatibility. Or at least it used to be, I'm happy to know very little about modern Windows, and it's definitely not backwards compatible with hardware...

    The person who wrote the "filtered out comment" was batshit crazy and clearly didn't even know what they were talking about. "Stable ABIs are what lead to corpo-capital interests infecting every single piece of technology and chaining us to their systems via vendor lock-in" is one of the most nonsense statements I've read on Lemmy. I wish I had more downvotes available.

    It's important to remember that the Linux kernel has millions of dollars and full time devs from companies like Google and Microsoft working on it. The Linux Desktop space does not have that. Like at all. Linux Desktop is predominantly a volunteer project. Valve has started putting money into it which is great, but that's very recent.

  • Programming @programming.dev
    qqq @lemmy.world

    Vulnerable Claude code in GitHub action led to stolen NPM keys

    github.com /nrwl/nx/security/advisories/GHSA-cxm3-wv7p-598c