I first learned how to program in 1984 at 14. The tech press said I'd be obsolete by 25, due to age.

About 1990 tech press said the Japanese were building fifth generation computers to make me obsolete.

In 2000, the dot com bubble bursting was said to make me obsolete.

There's been neural networks, no-code, and more, since then, to make me obsolete.

Now it's LLMs.

Excuse me while I sit here and don't panic.

#rant

EDIT: This blew up. Muting the thread for some peace and quiet.

@liw I don't really think it was like that. Maybe way before that, when computers were still mostly analog, digital computers emerged together with prog languages, those made the older analog computers and their operators quite quickly obsolete. But after that there had been no strong claim by anything that would make programmers and developers obsolete (until now with AI, that is.) I'd say it was rather the opposite for long. Everyone was rather strongly encouraged to learn some coding skills, because that was supposed to be a necessity in most future jobs. Specially younger generations and educational programs leaned that way for long. I'd say from way before 2010, and till after covid, at least right up till the AI hype exploded couple of years ago with chatgpt passing some "high level knowledge" exams, formerly out of league for any computer programs.

@raulinbonn @liw it's a fact that most people don't have the thinking required to be able to write code, let alone good code.

All the LLM bs is doing is taking away entry positions and when we are dead and gone there just will not be a replacement on the same level and this is going to be a cumulative process.

@TheOneDoc I feel it's not as if most people can't code, they can do it just fine. It's just that most people, in the pursuit of writing code and earning money, don't assign any thought or importance to things like the politics behind free software, the issues surrounding copyright laws, and how code gives an individual immense power and freedom that can rival the impact a corporation may have.

One of my major sources of inspiration for choosing computer science and being interested in free software was the documentary TPB AFK and The Internet's Own Boy: The Story of Aaron Swartz, not money or lines of code or cool software features or "blazing fast" performance or memory safety.

One of the (flawed) arguments I've read from people who cheer for LLMs is that they "democratize" access to knowledge and "liberate" it from the shackles of copyright.

It's unsurprising to see that people don't realise or care where these LLMs get their data from (by DDoSing websites) but it is surprising to see them not realise who ultimately controls these models and software and the training data behind it. Claude can't "democratize" knowledge because it's limited by the amount of tokens one has access to and the same goes for all the other LLMs. The access may be generous and subsidized at present because of a desire to make people dependent on it but it won't be like that way forever. I mean, we have seen this pattern before with streaming platforms as well but somehow the temptation in this case is too strong to ignore the wisdom people may have gained in the past? It's baffling.

The argument that LLMs liberate knowledge from copyright restrictions is hilarious. Apparently, the actions of corporations and firms who lobby for copyright and DRM isn't enough to make people realise that copyright can always be used by those in power to oppress individuals when it suits them, even at present. I mean, good luck defending oneself in court if a corporation decides that your LLM generated software infringes on their copyright. However, individuals never had and never will wield such power. All LLMs do is pit individuals against each other and give corporations even more power to violate copyright when it suits them and harass people when it doesn't.

@raulinbonn @liw

The Pirate Bay - The galaxy's most resilient bittorrent site

@ayushnix @raulinbonn @liw no you say most coders can code but what I said was that most humans can't because they can't break down a problem into logical steps. It's the same reason most people can't do (anything but basic) math.

Copyright is well and good if you have the money to actually get your right in the legal system.