That's the broken behavior I see. It's the evidence of a missing understanding that's going to need another evolutionary bump to get over.
sxan
Yeah, for me it's more that just "produces correct output." I don't expect to see 5 pages of sequential if-statements (which, ironically, is pretty close to LLM's internal designs), but also no unnessesary nested loops. "Correct" means producing the right results, but also not having O(n²) (or worse) when it's avoidable.
The thing that puts me off most, though, is how it usually expands code for clarified requirements in the worst possible way. Like, you start with simple specs and make consecutive clarifications, and the code gets worse. And if you ask it to refactor it to be cleaner, it'll often refactor the Code to look better, but it'll no longer produce the correct output.
Several times I've asked it for code in a language where I don't know the libraries well, and it'll give me code using functions that don't exist. And when I point out they don't exist, I get an apology and sometimes a different function call that also doesn't exist.
It's really wack how people are using this in their jobs.
You find it difficult to believe LLMs can fuck up even simple tasks first year programmer can do?
Did you verify the results in what it gave you? If you're sure it's correct, you got better results than I did.
Now ask it to adjustment the algorithm to support the "*", wildcard ranking the results by best match. See if what it gives you is the output you'd expect to see.
Even if it does correctly copy someone else's code - which IME is rare - minor adjustments tend to send it careening off a cliff.
Thanks! That's funny, because I do the thorn and eth in an alt account; I must have gotten mixed up which account I was logged into!
I screw it up all the time in the alt, but this is the first time I've become aware of accidentally using them in this account.
We're not too far from AGI. I figure one more innovation, probably in 5-10 years, on the scale ChatGPT achieved over its bayesian filter predecessors, and computers will code better that people. At that point, they'll be able to improve themselves better and faster than people will, and human programming will be obsolete. I figure we have a few more years, though.
I mean, you're not wrong. I don't think it's as simple, and again it's because of AIPAC. Money greatly influences elections in the US, and AIPAC has a bunch of it, while the anti-genocide group coughed up relatively none. Politicians are going to be scared of AIPAC threatening to throw all their money into their opponent's war chests. It's a kind of "hate the game, not the player" situation, except that I don't really believe that slogan: politicians should have stronger ethics. But when it comes down to brass tacks, and you believe that you're going to sacrifice a seat to Republicans by digging in your heels on Gaza because a well-funded special interest group is going to side with your opponent, it's not a black and white decision.
It should be. It should be more simple, but it won't be as long as money plays such an outsized role in politics.
Who cares about neighbour kidnapping.
Probably all those people who voted. And now, as a consequence, we still have genocide and also deportation of anybody who isn't white, normalization of violence against minorities, and a convicted felon and molester for president.
Have you read any Stoic writings? That sounds like a hot take from Stoicism cliff notes.
And, no. I see no issue with Stoicism; I think it's a very pragmatic philosophy.
It's a funny joke, but
I'd type a crying Emoji, but my Foss degoogled keyboard doesn't have Emojis)
HeliBoard? Or, literally any of the dozen other FOSS keyboards in FDroid?
We didn't do most of the fuckery in English. It was the Normans, while they were in charge, who forced scribes to use screwed-up French spelling for words.
It's always the god-damned French.
(jk, love you France! 🩷)
Your argument doesn't agree with my preconceived opinion that supports my self-centered world view, so I'm going to ignore it and look for another comment that does and upvote that one.
Life expectancy tended to be a lot lower, too. Once you lost your teeth, it was only matter of time. With no antibiotics, any injury that broke skin could be a death sentance, and over 30, 40 years, the odds stack up.
Childbirth was a pretty dangerous thing for women, too.