This is the part I don't understand. It's like sharing a finger painting half the time. Yes, cool, but so what?

[Edit: no need for the downvote, folks, it was an honest question although it seemed otherwise. I think the answers below make sense.]

▲

margalabargala 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The novelty of "new thing! That would have been incredibly hard a decade ago!" hasn't worn off yet.

This isn't the first time something like this has happened.

I would imagine that people had similar thoughts about the first photographs, when previously the only way to capture an image of something was via painting or woodcutting.

▲

jjmarr 2 hours ago | parent [-]

When movies first came out they would film random stuff because it was cool to see a train moving directly at you. The novelty didn't wear off for years.

▲

margalabargala 2 hours ago | parent [-]

There was something someone said in a comment here, years and years ago (pre AI), which has stuck with me.

Paraphrased, "There's basically no business in the Western world that wouldn't come out ahead with a competent software engineer working for $15 an hour".

Once agents, or now claws I guess, get another year of development under them they will be everywhere. People will have the novelty of "make me a website. Make it look like this. Make it so the customer gets notifications based on X Y and Z. Use my security cam footage to track the customer's object to give them status updates." And so on.

AI may or may not push the frontier of knowledge, TBD, but what it will absolutely do is pull up the baseline floor for everybody to a higher level of technical implementation.

▲

tcoff91 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

And the explosion in software produced with AI by lay-people will mean that those with offensive security skills, who can crack and exploit software systems, will have incredible power over others.

	▲	jpadkins 27 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		are you sure that AI generated code will be more vulnerable than a median software engineer? Why?

▲

rockskon an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

It's always a year® away. The amazing AI capability is "just around the corner"©. It will replace jobs soon™.

How much longer do we have to put up with people saying this? It's been four years now.

▲

margalabargala an hour ago | parent [-]

The things that people were saying were a year away a year or two ago are now here.

The things I am saying are now a year away, are not the things people were saying were a year away two years ago.

And you're going to have to put up with it forever, because "a year in the future" has always and will always be a year away.

▲

rockskon an hour ago | parent [-]

And yet it's never "now". The promised results are never here.

I understand one of the chief innovations the AI industry produces is rhetoric and hype, but it's insufferable and repetitive.

A better AI isn't good enough. "Closer" to a stated goal isn't good enough.

Deliver results that have value to more than just enthusiasts and academics.

▲

margalabargala 29 minutes ago | parent [-]

Sure it is. AI software development is here. It's not good enough for everything, but it's good enough for a majority of the changes made by most software engineers.

That's now. Right now, the tooling exists so that for >80% of software devs, 80% of the code they produce could be created by AI rather than by hand.

You can always find some person saying that it'll destroy all jobs in a year, or make us all rich in a year, or whatever, but your cynicism blinds you to the actual advances being made. There is an endless supply of new goalpost positions, they will never all be met, and an endless supply of chartalans claiming unrealistic futures. Don't confuse that with "and therefore results do not exist".

	▲	rockskon 2 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		No, it isn't. There is a gigantic chasm of difference between "80% of code they produce could be created by AI" and "80% of commits they produce could be created by AI". Mixing the two up is how we get a massive company like Microsoft to continually produce such atrocious software updates that destroy hardware or cause BSODs for their flagship Operating System. That's not replacing software development. That's dysfunction masquerading as capability. And none of what I said is goalpost moving. They are the goalposts constantly made by the AI industry and their hype-men. The very premise of replacing a significant amount of human labor underlies the exorbitant valuation AI has been given in the market.

▲

lm28469 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Because these people aren't excited about the actual building part, they crave the attention, the github stars, the views, &c. It's painfully obvious

▲

mghackerlady 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I have a similar feeling to people who upload their AI art to sites like danbooru. Like I guess I can understand making it for yourself but why do you think others want to see it

▲

em-bee an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

xkcd turned stick figure drawings into an art form. sometimes it is not about how something was created, but about the story being told.

some people build apps to solve a problem. why should they not share how they solved that problem?

i have written a blog post about a one line command that solves an interesting problem for me. for any experienced sysadmin that's just like a finger painting.

do we really need to argue if i should have written that post or not?