Comment by pllbnk
6 months ago
We're rapidly reaching trough of disillusionment with LLMs, and other generative transformer models for that matter. I am happy because it will help a lot of misinformed people understand what is and isn't possible (100+% productivity gains are not).
100% productivity gains on coding tasks are absolutely within the realm of possibility
It is possible to say the same about the low code solutions, e.g. a perfect UI can be used instead of writing a single line of code. The problem is that creating such a system is too resource intensive and counterproductive, and such a system does not exist. Similarly coding has always some problem that cannot be generalised due to the non existent pattern in training, and creating such a pattern beats the goal of having such a system.
And how much of productivity loss due to the insane amount of noise being generated ? (filler ridden reports, emails, videos, podcasts, &c.)
I'm talking about 100% net gain in productivity.
2 replies →
If that is the case, I would argue that you were taking money for doing a job that should've been automated or abstracted already.
I would disagree. I would argue that if you aren't seeing gains in your productivity, you're either using the tools incorrectly, or you are in some ultra specific niche area of coding that AI isn't helpful on yet.
don't know, maybe in the tecnical circles, but for users the thrill is still going on, and rising