mhoyeWhat if I could convince you that taking the same time to explain detailed requirements and carefully validate results with a junior colleague instead of a chatbot would not only give you two people who understood the code instead of zero, but if you do it a few times in a row you eventually get a senior colleague out of the deal for free.
アイアンハンドガンダム@mhoye unfortunately upper mgmt will acknowledge that, but then tell you that it's way cheaper in the short term to use a chatbot, and any long term consequences are unforeseeable and also not their problem anyway
Julien Barnoin
D2@julienbarnoin @mrt181 @mhoye it’s a few easy mathematically-sound steps from ‘cheaper/subsidized now but not when the bills are due’ to (a) adding up the bills, (b) amortizing (c) splitting that to make a per-user cost.
How are we going to pay them 1.6 trillion while unemployment spikes?
@cascheranno @mrt181 @mhoye I see two possible outcomes of AI progress and neither suggest it'll help at all to learn how to work with it.
- 1: It stops improving before it's good enough to do most people's jobs, the billions of investments stop pouring in, and AI companies crash.
- 2: It keeps improving and getting cheaper until most human jobs are dispensible. World economy collapses and AI companies crash due to lack of people with salaries to buy their service.
Is there a third path?
- 1: It stops improving before it's good enough to do most people's jobs, the billions of investments stop pouring in, and AI companies crash.
- 2: It keeps improving and getting cheaper until most human jobs are dispensible. World economy collapses and AI companies crash due to lack of people with salaries to buy their service.
Is there a third path?
Well, I worry about 2a: it’s like your 2, but an added step; jobs wiped out, many people broke, companies using AI then crash because their customer base shrinks, which crashes the AI companies before break-even.