[dartos]

The issue isn’t implementing mockups, it’s integrating with poorly documented existing systems, anticipating what could go wrong given a users path through the site, making it efficient, understandable, and maintainable.

Most of those tasks will be heavily changed by AI, but not replaced.

If you honestly think that statistics based AI can replace software engineers, then you either have no software engineering experience, don’t understand how AI works under the hood, or haven’t worked anywhere that does anything more than CRUD api development.

[ben_w]

> If you honestly think that statistics based AI can replace software engineers, then you either have no software engineering experience, don’t understand how AI works under the hood, or haven’t worked anywhere that does anything more than CRUD api development.

I don't understand how brains work under the hood (does anyone?), but zoom into the brain and you get chemistry, zoom into the chemistry and you get quantum mechanics, and that quantum mechanics is statistical in nature.

I don't know if that truth matters or not, because I don't know which layer of abstraction is the most relevant one for our intelligence. And without knowing that, I don't know if these models we have now can or can't be scaled up to do what we do: if what we are really does depend on some microtubule quantum computation, then no, no classical computer can ever be like us (though it is, still, statistics); on the other hand, if everything we are comes from the strengths of synaptic connections and internal bias of our neurons, then any sufficiently complex model can absolutely do all that we can do, and much faster too.

[dartos]

> I don't understand how brains work under the hood, but zoom into the brain

Come on, really? Are you comparing using your brain to using an LLM.

I didn’t even need to read the rest to know it was all nonsense.

LLMs aren’t magic. If you understand how they work, then you can understand the limitations of the approach. You seem to not.

[ben_w]

> I didn’t even need to read the rest to know it was all nonsense.

So, you're pattern matching without using careful logical analysis? Yes, this is a totally convincing demonstration of how humans are not at all like LLMs.

> LLMs aren’t magic.

Are humans?

I really liked the occult when I was a teenager. Despite trying, never found any real magic.

> Are you comparing using your brain to using an LLM.

Do you know where the name "neural network" comes from?

'course, the person I'm replying to probably isn't reading this anyway, given they said they stopped reading too soon the last time. This made me think: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39504270

[mouzogu]

i think there will be white box context sensitive solutions. which also takes into consideration privacy and intellecual property concerns.

but that probably will take much longer.

[dartos]

Those already exist, but are understood and provide professional support (in the form of engineers who extend the platform for a customer) (Hybris, CrystalCommerce, phpbb, discourse, etc.)

That engineer probably can’t even be replaced by AI since every new business is a snowflake once the low hanging fruit is gone.

I don’t think our current form of statistical models will ever be able to generalize and get into specifics at the same time.

AI will change how individual engineers work by being a more proactive search engine, but will not be relied on, by engineers, to write code entirely.