doc_ick

You say that like it’s a problem? Sounds like the junkies have to be fed one way or another.

“It’s a job that requires lots of human interaction, and this part is notoriously complicated for engineers.”

Don’t worry, human interaction is very complicated. Thankfully there are no llm models/google/xai with technology to do exactly that. Your pearls are safe.

Unless you’re able to get a patent on day one, once an idea is public potentially within the hour someone can make more money off of it and it’s not just your idea. Seems like a valid case to lock it down.

“if you are researching anything that can be applied to the industry, you will instead have 1 year of market ownership and first-mover advantage.”

I would like to disagree with you on that point. Given the very popular rise of https://rea.tools/, it appears the time to reverse engineer anything software based (up to maybe 80% or more?) could be down to minutes. With a recent example, some indie video game developers are not going to show off their video game until release as a few have been flipped and made it to market before the original developers have. Point being, a few moths of market ownership could be possible if llms can’t reverse it in any way.

Do we want everyone who doesn’t know how to program a car to reprogram their car? I.e. I think there should be restrictions on frontier models to ensure safety of others.

In no time? What are you talking about? It’d take months even with llms for it to be fully polished and tested if they started now.

“ if you're mad about your problem being solved, maybe you weren't in it for the right reasons”, politicians/financial advisors/military members/etc… would like a word with you.

The testing harness would have to be updated per game feature and to accommodate model tendencies or quirks. This sounds like regression tests with llms and some extra steps.

I think maybe 1 or 2 of those would take more than 1 year for an mvp. I will agree with you that with LLMs it’s infinitely easier and quicker to get a low quality mvp.

So in a sense, cobol is a higher level language then both due to PIC Clauses? I don’t follow this if higher level languages is solely based on syntactic sugar.

How would rust be generally higher level then go?

The difference would likely not be down to a pixel, either by dependence on how a model provider feels that day, the hallucinations of the day, or just some odd tangent that would get solved by ~100x tokens for verification. The hundreds of hours of testing could all effectively be 1===1, but it all looks green.

I.e. 8. A personal example: I'm remaking the engine of an old game commercial game in rust.

You don’t need an LLM for that, just some dedicated time for it. Also your phrasing needs a lot of work. I recommend the Dale Carnegie books on communicating with others.

I don’t quite follow. If you bring software worth into question, as you pointed out everyone’s vibe coding each of your examples so their individual worth has dropped significantly (with the unknown stability of support and long term plans).

My thought was LLMs accelerate the best and worst of development, but what couldn’t be done (outside of a large lab or company) by regular humans with an infinite time scale?

I guess that analogy works if the light at the end of the tunnel is like the sun.

That’s different from what OP said, and I doubt much if anything is automated with 100% accuracy 100% of the time.

It’d be a shame for researchers and society to have to burn through millions of tokens finding new advancements since people “do it for the vine “.

“If they can be automated, they are not necessary.” That’s a pretty interesting take as eventually everything could be automated.

Give us some examples of things that were not practically possible. Things are practically possible if the time or money is wisely spent, even if it takes a human a bit longer.

“To keep TasteVal uncontaminated, we do not release the tasks.” Nice

What kind of prompting did you have to use to ensure the iterations didn’t go off guardrails?

Agreed. It’s hard to tell what apps will “survive” other then making a splash, especially since there is a constant reliance on llms with fluctuating costs and seemingly an over reliance on rust being the ideal language for everything.

I mean pdf is made by Adobe so they can change their standard. If I were distributing software I’d want guarantees it only ingests trusted data, not only for software but for non-tech peoples trusts. No need for poisoned data further diving into the software/llms.

With the increased computation given to LLMs for the new development practices, wouldn’t any extra sha be a much smaller accommodation (then claude, chatgpt, etc…)?

It does make sense to set sha256 as the default. I would like even strong to future proof things a bit, but sha256 is a good upgrade.

Seems like rage bait, makes a claim of a lot of computation in the era of LLM where computation is already out the window.

So you’d rather have a weak default for everyone rather than updating it? Share some PII then, I’m sure a mod will block it.

Why so much hate? Even so much as to build a downstream “fork” of tika that requires some kind of extra maintenance/tooling?

After parsing that article to get the paper link, that is insane. I am not in the field, but find it curious that each every person of that list of authors had direct significant contribution. Not my field though so just seems odd.

Was OpenAI available at that time? No, bad comparison bot.