powerline-d (I got an AI to port powerline-shell to D) (page 2)

September 26

Re: powerline-d (I got an AI to port powerline-shell to D)

Posted by FeepingCreature
in reply to Vladimir Marchevsky

Permalink

FeepingCreature

Posted in reply to Vladimir Marchevsky

Permalink

On Tuesday, 24 September 2024 at 07:23:26 UTC, Vladimir Marchevsky wrote:

On Monday, 23 September 2024 at 08:46:30 UTC, aberba wrote:

You would be surprised how much original code and code modifications LLMs can output. I wouldn't be to quick to dismiss them as mere translation tools.

For example, take a look at the intro video on the Zed homepage to see what can be achieved with AI assisted coding (https://zed.dev/)

I've seen that. My point is: while AI sometimes can really look great doing something, people should always keep in mind it's just a complex math intended to generate specific patterns. It's not intelligent

If somebody implemented intelligence as an algorithm, what form would you expect it to take other than "complex math generating specific patterns"?

it doesn't really understand any context, neither it understands anything it outputs.

You can disprove this to yourself by just talking to it. Have a chat, have it explain what it was going for. Doesn't always work reliably, but that there's no understanding there is easily disproven.

Image generation is a great example: there are lot of nice images done by AI but there are also tons of garbage produced - with wrong limbs, distorted faces, etc, etc.

It should be noted that the text models used by image generators are, by current-year standards, absolutely tiny. Like, GPT-2 tier. It does not surprise me that they don't understand things, nor does it say anything about the chat models, which can be a hundred times or more bigger.

General-use ChatGPT answers with lots of text meaning barely anything or swapping topics is another great example. And while you sometimes can be fine with some small mistakes in image, coding has no room for that.

As usual - make sure you're using GPT-4 not 3.5!

The question isn't "does it make mistakes", the question is "does it make more mistakes than I do." And in my experience, Sonnet makes less. His code compiles a lot more reliably than mine does!

So, my personal opinion: AI can be great in generating some repetitive or well-defined code to do some typing instead of human, but it still needs a good programmer to ensure all results are correct.

Well, that's the case anyways.

On Thursday, 26 September 2024 at 06:58:28 UTC, FeepingCreature wrote:

If somebody implemented intelligence as an algorithm, what form would you expect it to take other than "complex math generating specific patterns"?

"If"s are the matter of sci-fi. We are talking about usage of existing software.

You can disprove this to yourself by just talking to it. Have a chat, have it explain what it was going for. Doesn't always work reliably, but that there's no understanding there is easily disproven.

"Doesn't work reliably" is an actual proof of it having no understanding. It's patterns just sometimes match common logic (or you imagine the reasons behind it). If some kid sometimes called a specific animal a cat and other times called the same animal a dog, you'll be sure that kid has no idea what cats and dogs actually are.

Extremely advanced waxwork is still a waxwork, even when it looks like a real food or person. It doesn't matter how many patterns you put into model, it still just randomly mimics those patterns.

The question isn't "does it make mistakes", the question is "does it make more mistakes than I do." And in my experience, Sonnet makes less. His code compiles a lot more reliably than mine does!

I'll keep that without response, I think...

Forums