Do we want everyone who doesn’t know how to program a car to reprogram their car? I.e. I think there should be restrictions on frontier models to ensure safety of others.
In no time? What are you talking about? It’d take months even with llms for it to be fully polished and tested if they started now.
“ if you're mad about your problem being solved, maybe you weren't in it for the right reasons”, politicians/financial advisors/military members/etc… would like a word with you.
[dead]
The testing harness would have to be updated per game feature and to accommodate model tendencies or quirks. This sounds like regression tests with llms and some extra steps.
I think maybe 1 or 2 of those would take more than 1 year for an mvp. I will agree with you that with LLMs it’s infinitely easier and quicker to get a low quality mvp.
So in a sense, cobol is a higher level language then both due to PIC Clauses? I don’t follow this if higher level languages is solely based on syntactic sugar.
How would rust be generally higher level then go?
The difference would likely not be down to a pixel, either by dependence on how a model provider feels that day, the hallucinations of the day, or just some odd tangent that would get solved by ~100x tokens for…
I.e. 8. A personal example: I'm remaking the engine of an old game commercial game in rust. You don’t need an LLM for that
I don’t quite follow. If you bring software worth into question, as you pointed out everyone’s vibe coding each of your examples so their individual worth has dropped significantly (with the unknown stability of support…
I guess that analogy works if the light at the end of the tunnel is like the sun.
That’s different from what OP said, and I doubt much if anything is automated with 100% accuracy 100% of the time.
It’d be a shame for researchers and society to have to burn through millions of tokens finding new advancements since people “do it for the vine “.
“If they can be automated, they are not necessary.” That’s a pretty interesting take as eventually everything could be automated.
Give us some examples of things that were not practically possible. Things are practically possible if the time or money is wisely spent, even if it takes a human a bit longer.
“To keep TasteVal uncontaminated, we do not release the tasks.” Nice
Do we want everyone who doesn’t know how to program a car to reprogram their car? I.e. I think there should be restrictions on frontier models to ensure safety of others.
In no time? What are you talking about? It’d take months even with llms for it to be fully polished and tested if they started now.
“ if you're mad about your problem being solved, maybe you weren't in it for the right reasons”, politicians/financial advisors/military members/etc… would like a word with you.
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
The testing harness would have to be updated per game feature and to accommodate model tendencies or quirks. This sounds like regression tests with llms and some extra steps.
I think maybe 1 or 2 of those would take more than 1 year for an mvp. I will agree with you that with LLMs it’s infinitely easier and quicker to get a low quality mvp.
So in a sense, cobol is a higher level language then both due to PIC Clauses? I don’t follow this if higher level languages is solely based on syntactic sugar.
How would rust be generally higher level then go?
The difference would likely not be down to a pixel, either by dependence on how a model provider feels that day, the hallucinations of the day, or just some odd tangent that would get solved by ~100x tokens for…
I.e. 8. A personal example: I'm remaking the engine of an old game commercial game in rust. You don’t need an LLM for that
I don’t quite follow. If you bring software worth into question, as you pointed out everyone’s vibe coding each of your examples so their individual worth has dropped significantly (with the unknown stability of support…
I guess that analogy works if the light at the end of the tunnel is like the sun.
That’s different from what OP said, and I doubt much if anything is automated with 100% accuracy 100% of the time.
It’d be a shame for researchers and society to have to burn through millions of tokens finding new advancements since people “do it for the vine “.
“If they can be automated, they are not necessary.” That’s a pretty interesting take as eventually everything could be automated.
Give us some examples of things that were not practically possible. Things are practically possible if the time or money is wisely spent, even if it takes a human a bit longer.
“To keep TasteVal uncontaminated, we do not release the tasks.” Nice