|
|
|
|
|
by kfarr
1040 days ago
|
|
I’m reminded of the difference between being efficient vs effective. So much of the example use cases I see people — including myself — using GPT for are unimportant short-term tasks that necessarily take away head space and time from long-term important tasks. Those long-term important tasks are the hard ones requiring existing application context where I experience LLMs struggling. If we’re not careful we’ll get DDoS’ed by the tasks that an LLM can complete at the expense of other tasks. Of course this may change in the future as things progress, but is my observation for now. |
|
I feel like a lot of the evergreen hype in computing is framework, practices, etc, that try to break things down into a system where any junior could then just fill in each piece and of course this always collides with the larger context problems.
Once you get to a certain point with such a system, either you have been paying attention all along or you have no idea what you've made and how to deal with a real cross cutting problem and you get to the point where the systems promise is really irrelevant, you succeed based on actual expertise you supposedly weren't going to need.
With GPT-like AI around its current level, I feel like some of these systems for breaking down programming projects are going to face an actual test now that the junior engineers to do it are some GPU costs that could be run in parallel and won't have the usual heterogeneous resources problems of testing with a real project team.
I'm not really sure if any systems will survive (or something learned in the process will make a good one) but I feel like it would be a proof of a holy grail that is suppose quite important, and just the refutation of many systems is itself a major disruption to the field.