|
Wordle 316 4/6
β¬β¬β¬π¨β¬
π¨π¨π¨β¬β¬
π¨π©β¬π©β¬
π©π©π©π©π©
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 316 4/6
β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬
β¬π©π©π¨β¬
β¬π©π©β¬π©
π©π©π©π©π©
|
|
|
|
|
Wrong starter word choice, wrong second word choice ... close one:
Wordle 316 5/6
β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬
β¬🟩β¬🟨β¬
β¬🟩🟩β¬β¬
β¬🟩🟩β¬β¬
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 316 4/6
β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬
β¬π©β¬π¨π¨
π¨π©π¨β¬β¬
π©π©π©π©π©
The 'wrong' opening word actually gave me a huge advantage today... 
βReal stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.β
β Terry Pratchett, Hogfather
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 316 5/6
β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬
β¬π¨π¨β¬β¬
π¨π©β¬β¬β¬
β¬π©π©π¨β¬
π©π©π©π©π©
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 316 5/6
π¨β¬β¬β¬β¬
β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬
β¬β¬π¨β¬β¬
π©π¨π¨π©β¬
π©π©π©π©π©
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 316 4/6*
β¬β¬β¬π¨β¬
β¬π¨β¬β¬β¬
β¬π©π©π¨β¬
π©π©π©π©π©
Happiness will never come to those who fail to appreciate what they already have. -Anon
|
|
|
|
|
There are two schools of thought. Those with a background in business see developers as commodities and fully believe that programmers will program themselves out of a job field. The idea is that in some distant future, jobs like project manager, product manager, and marketing manager will still be critical but programmers themselves will be extinct as a result of the tools they created.
The other school of thought is hard to understand because the programmers are laughing so hard they canβt talk.
Source: Carey Aydelotte's answer to Will software engineers ever stop being in demand? - Quora[^] 
|
|
|
|
|
That makes me think of this old song (probably from before your time  ):
Quote: Girls are dancing all around them just for me
And the party wouldn't swing if not for me
I've made you hearts jump, I've caused a heat
I'm in demand I am the beat
Look - I am the beat 1981 - YouTube[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Never heard of them, don't know the song either.
All I can say is their logo reminds me of Star Wars 
|
|
|
|
|
I'd forgotten about that track. Now I've got an earworm. It was released a couple of years after I left school.
|
|
|
|
|
Who would introduce bugs if not software engineers?
The less you need, the more you have.
Even a blind squirrel gets a nut...occasionally.
JaxCoder.com
|
|
|
|
|
Entomologists?
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Assuming that AI writes the code flawlessly, then the writers of the "unambiguous" specifications.
Writing those specs would still be similar to coding, but in a natural language. It might be more like functional programming in that the flow wouldn't have to be linear. Details could appear in different paragraphs, with the AI referring to them as required.
|
|
|
|
|
Greg Utas wrote: Assuming that AI writes the code flawlessly
According to ambiguous user specs?
The less you need, the more you have.
Even a blind squirrel gets a nut...occasionally.
JaxCoder.com
|
|
|
|
|
Flawlessly if the spec is unambiguous. Otherwise you get...something, though you could argue that the AI should refuse to write the code in that case.
|
|
|
|
|
Greg Utas wrote: though you could argue that the AI should refuse to write the code in that case
If real-life developers can't get away with that attitude today, why should an AI in the future?
|
|
|
|
|
Artificial Intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.
(Attributed to Einstein)
|
|
|
|
|
"I'm now telling the computer EXACTLY what it can do with a lifetime supply of chocolate."
|
|
|
|
|
You don't see the contradiction in that assumption?
If we already knew exactly what to do in every case, we would not need an AI. If we don't know, we better leave the AI some room to learn, and don't hard code our incomplete ideas into it. The problem is that no AI up to now is aware enough to recognize insufficient results of this complexity, and much less is then able to decide on a reasonable course of action.
Natural stupidity is one thing, but artificial stupidity can be even more entertaining.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't see a contradiction. I was assuming that the AI was for generating code from a natural language spec, not for helping with the spec itself. But because the AI has to understand the spec, it should complain if the spec is incomplete.
|
|
|
|
|
And how do your train your AI to do that without already knowing how to do that?
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know how to train it. I was just assuming that it existed. Maybe it would be trained similar to Google Translate, which is constantly improving. But it would be even far more complex than that, so maybe it will never exist.
|
|
|
|
|
Never say never, but it is not going to be so easy as some people would like it to be. And in the end it will be questionable if the whole effort is worth the results. It might be easier to use the original for a while longer than to create a machine in our own image.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
I've been hearing similar since the late 80's. Does anyone here remember CASE tools, how they would allow a person to design software specs and them the code would be generated for you? That didn't seem to last too long....
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
