AGI_69 t1_isryx3m wrote on October 18, 2022 at 7:25 AM

People do not understand, what "programmers" do day-to-day, so this kind of question pops up all the time. Most of the time, we don't write these dummy, generic codes that Codex produces. Also, you already don't have to write ton of code yourself, because it's on the github or stackoverflow. Now, when AI starts to understand larger systems and their design, debate tradoffs etc - and starts to make suggestions and implement them, than I will be amazed, even though I know it's coming.

The comparison with artists, is not good one. Codebase that, has thousands (miliions) lines of codes, it interacting with 40 other components etc etc, is not same as image, where you have large room of error. You can literally change one symbol in codebase and it fails or has bug.

AdditionalPizza OP t1_isscciv wrote on October 18, 2022 at 10:41 AM

>You can literally change one symbol in codebase and it fails or has bug.

But the new Codex checks and corrects itself?

But I know it's not the best comparison, and I understand there's much more to programming than just typing out code. But it's more a question about efficiency of each programmer will in turn require less programmers to get a task completed. I don't think high skill positions are going to be axed quite yet. But entry level positions? I just don't see how they will be as plentiful as they are today.

Even if Codex won't be sufficient today with the current model being released soon. These AI have a track record of starting slow, then getting impressive then mind boggling in a matter of a year, then every few months it's updated and improved.

Again, it doesn't have to be full automation, just enough to replace the majority of entry level positions.

AGI_69 t1_issnbhz wrote on October 18, 2022 at 12:35 PM

>But the new Codex checks and corrects itself?

Only syntactic errors, not functional.

>just enough to replace the majority of entry level positions.

Codex is very far from that. I think, you have wrong idea what juniors do. Even the juniors have understanding of the parts of the system and they cannot be instructed by few sentences. Most of their work, is actually trying to understand, what is wanted from them - which computers are really bad at still.
There are layers of understanding, it will take leaps in AI, before it can easily reason about high level abstractions and implement it in code.
Also, the "programming" is not perfect information game. You have to ask LOT OF questions and debates, before you and the client converge on what they need.
I am sure, it will come, but right now, nobody is using it for real work.