• sudneo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    21 hours ago

    Humans are notoriously worse at tasks that have to do with reviewing than they are at tasks that have to do with creating. Editing an article is more boring and painful than writing it. Understanding and debugging code is much harder than writing it etc., observing someone cooking to spot mistakes is more boring than cooking etc.

    This also fights with the attention required to perform those tasks, which means a higher ratio of reviewing vs creating tasks leads to lower quality output because attention is depleted at some point and mistakes slip in. All this with the additional “bonus” to have to pay for the tool AND the human reviewing while also wasting tons of water and energy. I think it’s wise to ask ourselves whether this makes sense at all.

    • brie@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      To make sense of that, figure out what pays more observing/editing or cooking/writing. Big shekels will make boring parts exciting

      • sudneo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Think also the amount of people doing both. Also writers earn way more than editors, and stellar chefs earn way more than cooking critics.

        If you think devs will be paid more to review GPT code, well, I would love to have your optimism.

        • brie@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 hours ago

          I’m too unfamiliar with the cooking and writing/publishing biz. I’d rather not use this analogy.

          I can see many business guys paying for something like Devin, making a mess, then hiring someone to fix it. I can see companies not hiring junior devs, and requiring old devs to learn to generate and debug. Just like they required devs to be “full stack”. You can easily prevent that if you have your own company. If … Do you have your own company?

          • sudneo@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            13 hours ago

            I don’t, like 99% of people don’t or won’t. My job is safe, I am arguing from a collective perspective.

            I simply don’t think companies will act like that. Also the mere reduction of total number of positions will compress salaries.

            • brie@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              13 hours ago

              What collective perspective? There’s gonna be winners and losers, non uniform rewards and costs. Companies are already acting like that. And IMO more will join. They’re a hive mind who eagerly copy Google, Amazon, Facebook. And younger devs will add “LLM code gen” to their resumes. No job is safe, even kings and dictators get their heads chopped off.

              • sudneo@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 hours ago

                Tech worker collective perspective. Those whose jobs will generally be affected due to idiots in position of power who are ready to believe that LLMs can do a good chunk of what devs do.

                  • sudneo@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    5 hours ago

                    That the world is not a cartoon and even idiots have structural power and it’s not me “letting them”? Aldo again, this is not a “me” discussion. I will be fine. But many people in the industry will be screwed.