It doesn't work in software either, in the exact same way. It's just that everyone and their dog wants to "take programmers down a notch" so they are exceedingly happy to accept the resulting mediocrity.

Joke's on them, all intellectual work is modelling to some degree, and can be automated in the exact same way with the exact same mediocre results. How long until someone vibe codes a Lean for structural engineering?

▲

1718627440 6 hours ago | parent [-]

> How long until someone vibe codes a Lean for structural engineering?

That's the reason these profession is regulated. Regulation is written in blood.

▲

strange_quark an hour ago | parent | next [-]

After the past week or so, I wouldn't be surprised if we end up with professional licensing for software engineering.

▲

za_creature 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

What you call regulation, Sam & Dario would call labeling data.

▲

1718627440 4 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm not sure I can follow.

	▲	za_creature 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Regulations would act as "unit tests" for a machine-produced design in the same way Lean validates that the theorems prove... something. Of course, they were written to prevent human errors from otherwise well meaning but possibly clumsy actors. Nobody has a fucking clue what the error envelope of these models actually is, they just use magic words like "apply guard rails" as if there wasn't a whole area of science surrounding error propagation that they couldn't apply because the models themselves are vibe-data-scienced together. Academia has similar rules to prevent clout farmers and incentivize discovery, though in that case the followers of the machine god have already decided that the human scum must refrain from thinking and instead spend all of their time deciphering the gospel. Or maybe it was all propaganda, possibly generated by some weird text generator that was recently invented ¯\_(ツ)_/¯