Not quite. Most all programming jobs are translation jobs, where you take some business requirement and put it into code. Which is why GPT models are going to render most of those jobs obsolete.
Not quite. Most all programming jobs are translation jobs, where you take some business requirement and put it into code. Which is why GPT models are going to render most of those jobs obsolete.
But designing a user interface that's intuitive or chooses sensible default values, especially one that isn't "typical" (where a business model or user use case already exists), or one that's not trivial to specify, or complex to integrate into a workflow -- these use cases will require iteration in order to specify useably. And revision of a specification is an ability where language-based specification tools like GPT have yet to prove themselves -- like activities such as interactive debugging or the performance tuning of an implementation.
How do you describe a task to ChatGPT that isn't yet well defined and still requires iterative refinement with the user to nail down? Until ChatGPT can perform Q&A to "fill in the blanks" and resolve the requirements in a custom task, a human in the loop will still be still needed.
Think of ChatGPT as a way to code using templates bigger than the ones used today. Initially it's templates will be smaller than the average function. It's hard to know how long before its templates will grow in size and complexity sufficient to build a full blown app, unless that app is pretty trivial and requires no customization. I'm guessing it'll be years before it creates apps.
A scaffold is basically a code template that gets you started with writing a particular class so you don't have to start from zero.
ChatGPT is an amazing scaffold generator, which isn't suprising because that is one of the defining features of an LLM but people extrapolate this and say absurd things that simply trigger my bullshit detector.
Prompting an AI to write text is also quite a slow back and forth process that took me two hours for a basic class I could have written in 5 minutes but since the AI can answer with bullshit in five seconds I am now obsolete even though it needs multiple iterations and reading the code is the bottleneck and I practically did all the work. (Integrating the code into my project and doubling the lines of code because asking it to make the modifications and additions is just way too slow. Typing is just too damn fast to bother. Maybe teach your developers touch typing so they don't suck versus AI?)
Also the OpenAI coding model code-davinci-002 has an 8000 token max not 4000 like text-davinci-003.
There just needs to be more targeted training, and some system built around it to write a complete service code, and you can replace a good number of jobs solely through that.
By pure I mean with no other requirements such as accessing another data store and running a bunch of rules decided by having several meetings with various people to find out what is actually required… a bit like what chatGPT doesn’t do.
On the point of >Almost all programming jobs are actually software engineering jobs these days.
Thats a very narrow view of Computer Science, ignoring how software and hardware can be exploited in air gapped scenarios, exploiting what the military have traditionally called Signal Intelligence, not something taught in any university or online as far as I'm aware of.
The undetectable metadata by human senses because of restrictions like our range of audible sounds, ability to detect tiny fluctuations of electromagnetic radiation, lack of knowledge of a devices ability, makes most computer science graduates somewhat blinkered and restricted in perspective and highly exploitable, with hubris being the number one attribute for most.
IMO Computer Science should be viewed more as a natural science, incorporating things like physics, biology, psychology, chemistry along with what's currently taught in a stereotypical CS course. I'm reminded of the fact that my language debugger is an excellent colour blind test operating in plain sight and when you become wise to these additional points of interest, you start to see the chaff from the wheat, whose good, whose not because Only the Paranoid Survive!
How many people will come into contact with an air gapped system in their entire lives?
Are you a bot trying to resource burn me? If a bot, would you even know you are a bot?
> Are you a bot trying to resource burn me?
Seek help.
Funny, seems that this take is more obsolete than the degree itself :)