If you read nothing else today, read Matt Shumer on AI

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Senior Python Developer. I cannot speak for anyone but myself. In my case and I repeat my case (meaning my experience) GitHub copilot has been spectacular. My productivity has increased significantly. I know everyone is asking for specifics. So let me give you specifics. I wrote code mostly functional style. I can write copilot to generate for me in this style. We have had a vacant position for 12 months. And we don't need to fill it because the person in that post pretty much does the same thing I do.

Does it mean AI is going to replace me? Maybe. But the question really is whether I should waste my time worrying about whether AI will take over my job. I am just worried about learning whatever tools at my disposal.

I am just confused why people are pushing back so forcebly over something they have ZERO influence over. The amount of money being spent on AI is massive. Your congresspeople cannot stop it. You cannot stop it.

Everytime someone says something about AI someone jumps in and say I have used and it was useless. Therefore because it was useless for you last week it will be useless a year from now okay great lol.

Or every shortcomings of AI is so magnified and become subject of mockery

Hey you make decisions for yourself. If you think you are safe today and 10 years from now great for you.

And to your point, AI is doing stuff for YOU a tech bro. But to the people you talk to who aren’t in tech, AI isn’t doing anything for them. AI is being built for the tech bros of which you are one. The systems the rest of us use are complete crap. Older than the hills technology. (Not really, but you understand the meaning). The fact that portals at the doctors offices are horrible, the computers at the hospitals require a ton of wait time teachers have awful systems to record grading. All of those things would be a better use of money for more of us. A robot to clean dishes would be awesome. But that isn’t what tech is doing, tech is building for tech to keep money in the higher levels of tech.

Most of us are fighting it because we see exactly zero of this. It isn’t improving our lives and the more you all sap money to make things easier for you, the less money there will be for the rest of us who are out doing things to make society run.

+1

I deal with people as my job. People who need a helping hand, are dealing with hard situations, or could use a caring conversation. I've been tinkering with AI for improving my writing, since that is how I thought it could help me with my job. I'm not impressed. In fact, I wrote a paragraph, and someone gave me "feedback". I thought it was super wordy and more confusing than what I wrote. I had a hunch, so I took my original paragraph and ran it through our org's AI. Yup, sure enough, it spit out the "feedback" verbatim. I think I'm going to tinker next with spreadsheets, not sure how yet. But some people are having a hard time understanding that for many fields, AI just isn't a game changer. Maybe it will be in the future, but now, it just annoys me.

AI is actually really, really good for mastering all kinds of cool excel features. Excel is extremely powerful but lots of its features are not intuitive and require multiple steps or even VBA code, which an LLM can walk you through and troubleshoot step by step, and quickly. This is the best thing I have found it does at work and it’s quite valuable.

It doesn’t even have to be that technical. Microsoft stock would pop if they released an ad that was simply someone talking to a computer giving it instructions for what they wanted Office to do. “Hey Excel, import this file, find all overdue invoices, export the information to Outlook, and craft an email to each customer. Track responses and update the spreadsheet.”

Nothing about that is difficult, but that is what people understand. Not replacing vibe coding.

PP who wants to tinker with spreadsheets.

Yes, you get me completely. Those types of tasks are a time suck. Not rocket science to complete but necessary. I imagine how much more time I could spend on improving mission delivery and being face to face with people if AI could do it for me. And no, it isn't replacing a human, it's reducing a human's unrealistic workload deemed realistic by another human.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Senior Python Developer. I cannot speak for anyone but myself. In my case and I repeat my case (meaning my experience) GitHub copilot has been spectacular. My productivity has increased significantly. I know everyone is asking for specifics. So let me give you specifics. I wrote code mostly functional style. I can write copilot to generate for me in this style. We have had a vacant position for 12 months. And we don't need to fill it because the person in that post pretty much does the same thing I do.

Does it mean AI is going to replace me? Maybe. But the question really is whether I should waste my time worrying about whether AI will take over my job. I am just worried about learning whatever tools at my disposal.

I am just confused why people are pushing back so forcebly over something they have ZERO influence over. The amount of money being spent on AI is massive. Your congresspeople cannot stop it. You cannot stop it.

Everytime someone says something about AI someone jumps in and say I have used and it was useless. Therefore because it was useless for you last week it will be useless a year from now okay great lol.

Or every shortcomings of AI is so magnified and become subject of mockery

Hey you make decisions for yourself. If you think you are safe today and 10 years from now great for you.

And to your point, AI is doing stuff for YOU a tech bro. But to the people you talk to who aren’t in tech, AI isn’t doing anything for them. AI is being built for the tech bros of which you are one. The systems the rest of us use are complete crap. Older than the hills technology. (Not really, but you understand the meaning). The fact that portals at the doctors offices are horrible, the computers at the hospitals require a ton of wait time teachers have awful systems to record grading. All of those things would be a better use of money for more of us. A robot to clean dishes would be awesome. But that isn’t what tech is doing, tech is building for tech to keep money in the higher levels of tech.

Most of us are fighting it because we see exactly zero of this. It isn’t improving our lives and the more you all sap money to make things easier for you, the less money there will be for the rest of us who are out doing things to make society run.

+1

I deal with people as my job. People who need a helping hand, are dealing with hard situations, or could use a caring conversation. I've been tinkering with AI for improving my writing, since that is how I thought it could help me with my job. I'm not impressed. In fact, I wrote a paragraph, and someone gave me "feedback". I thought it was super wordy and more confusing than what I wrote. I had a hunch, so I took my original paragraph and ran it through our org's AI. Yup, sure enough, it spit out the "feedback" verbatim. I think I'm going to tinker next with spreadsheets, not sure how yet. But some people are having a hard time understanding that for many fields, AI just isn't a game changer. Maybe it will be in the future, but now, it just annoys me.

AI is actually really, really good for mastering all kinds of cool excel features. Excel is extremely powerful but lots of its features are not intuitive and require multiple steps or even VBA code, which an LLM can walk you through and troubleshoot step by step, and quickly. This is the best thing I have found it does at work and it’s quite valuable.

It doesn’t even have to be that technical. Microsoft stock would pop if they released an ad that was simply someone talking to a computer giving it instructions for what they wanted Office to do. “Hey Excel, import this file, find all overdue invoices, export the information to Outlook, and craft an email to each customer. Track responses and update the spreadsheet.”

Nothing about that is difficult, but that is what people understand. Not replacing vibe coding.

PP who wants to tinker with spreadsheets.

Yes, you get me completely. Those types of tasks are a time suck. Not rocket science to complete but necessary. I imagine how much more time I could spend on improving mission delivery and being face to face with people if AI could do it for me. And no, it isn't replacing a human, it's reducing a human's unrealistic workload deemed realistic by another human.

While that sounds great, before you get too optimistic, I would remind you that your workload will still be determined by the same unrealistic human.

My father was an accountant at a large bank in the 70s. While computers existed, the were far less powerful and more difficult to use, so staffing relied mostly on human efficiency. While my father was there, they cut staffing, so my father worked harder to make sure the deadlines were met. Since the same work was still completed with less personnel costs, management decided it was a great idea - in fact, they could probably save more with additional cuts, which they also made, multiple times. My dad, who felt as a professional he was obligated to complete the task kept working longer and harder. I saw little of him, because he worked so late, and every month there were rush days where he might just stay at the office.

My mother, finally pushed him to leaving his accounting position to become a postal employee, where she felt as an hourly worker, he’d at least be compensated for overtime. While he always missed accounting, he agreed that the bank had been taking advantage of him.

Your management doesn’t care that your job is easier or that your schedule is more flexible. Their only goal is to maximize profits by increasing productivity and decreasing costs. Once they realize that the department can meet the production goals with less labor, there is a good chance that your department will shrink, either through attrition or by a worker being fired and their workload being distributed to you and your colleagues. Hopefully they won’t decide you are the extraneous worker whose workload can be reassigned to others to improve their efficiency ratings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Senior Python Developer. I cannot speak for anyone but myself. In my case and I repeat my case (meaning my experience) GitHub copilot has been spectacular. My productivity has increased significantly. I know everyone is asking for specifics. So let me give you specifics. I wrote code mostly functional style. I can write copilot to generate for me in this style. We have had a vacant position for 12 months. And we don't need to fill it because the person in that post pretty much does the same thing I do.

Does it mean AI is going to replace me? Maybe. But the question really is whether I should waste my time worrying about whether AI will take over my job. I am just worried about learning whatever tools at my disposal.

I am just confused why people are pushing back so forcebly over something they have ZERO influence over. The amount of money being spent on AI is massive. Your congresspeople cannot stop it. You cannot stop it.

Everytime someone says something about AI someone jumps in and say I have used and it was useless. Therefore because it was useless for you last week it will be useless a year from now okay great lol.

Or every shortcomings of AI is so magnified and become subject of mockery

Hey you make decisions for yourself. If you think you are safe today and 10 years from now great for you.

And to your point, AI is doing stuff for YOU a tech bro. But to the people you talk to who aren’t in tech, AI isn’t doing anything for them. AI is being built for the tech bros of which you are one. The systems the rest of us use are complete crap. Older than the hills technology. (Not really, but you understand the meaning). The fact that portals at the doctors offices are horrible, the computers at the hospitals require a ton of wait time teachers have awful systems to record grading. All of those things would be a better use of money for more of us. A robot to clean dishes would be awesome. But that isn’t what tech is doing, tech is building for tech to keep money in the higher levels of tech.

Most of us are fighting it because we see exactly zero of this. It isn’t improving our lives and the more you all sap money to make things easier for you, the less money there will be for the rest of us who are out doing things to make society run.

+1

I deal with people as my job. People who need a helping hand, are dealing with hard situations, or could use a caring conversation. I've been tinkering with AI for improving my writing, since that is how I thought it could help me with my job. I'm not impressed. In fact, I wrote a paragraph, and someone gave me "feedback". I thought it was super wordy and more confusing than what I wrote. I had a hunch, so I took my original paragraph and ran it through our org's AI. Yup, sure enough, it spit out the "feedback" verbatim. I think I'm going to tinker next with spreadsheets, not sure how yet. But some people are having a hard time understanding that for many fields, AI just isn't a game changer. Maybe it will be in the future, but now, it just annoys me.

AI is actually really, really good for mastering all kinds of cool excel features. Excel is extremely powerful but lots of its features are not intuitive and require multiple steps or even VBA code, which an LLM can walk you through and troubleshoot step by step, and quickly. This is the best thing I have found it does at work and it’s quite valuable.

It doesn’t even have to be that technical. Microsoft stock would pop if they released an ad that was simply someone talking to a computer giving it instructions for what they wanted Office to do. “Hey Excel, import this file, find all overdue invoices, export the information to Outlook, and craft an email to each customer. Track responses and update the spreadsheet.”

Nothing about that is difficult, but that is what people understand. Not replacing vibe coding.

The problem is that to actually automate the sequence of actions you describe with Microsoft products SUCKS. It’s not intuitive or easy, and it only works after tinkering for a process for hours (ask me how I know).

Microsoft knows this I’m sure and instead of making their products work they are dumping money into AI which will then describe how to use software that doesn’t really work that well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Senior Python Developer. I cannot speak for anyone but myself. In my case and I repeat my case (meaning my experience) GitHub copilot has been spectacular. My productivity has increased significantly. I know everyone is asking for specifics. So let me give you specifics. I wrote code mostly functional style. I can write copilot to generate for me in this style. We have had a vacant position for 12 months. And we don't need to fill it because the person in that post pretty much does the same thing I do.

Does it mean AI is going to replace me? Maybe. But the question really is whether I should waste my time worrying about whether AI will take over my job. I am just worried about learning whatever tools at my disposal.

I am just confused why people are pushing back so forcebly over something they have ZERO influence over. The amount of money being spent on AI is massive. Your congresspeople cannot stop it. You cannot stop it.

Everytime someone says something about AI someone jumps in and say I have used and it was useless. Therefore because it was useless for you last week it will be useless a year from now okay great lol.

Or every shortcomings of AI is so magnified and become subject of mockery

Hey you make decisions for yourself. If you think you are safe today and 10 years from now great for you.

And to your point, AI is doing stuff for YOU a tech bro. But to the people you talk to who aren’t in tech, AI isn’t doing anything for them. AI is being built for the tech bros of which you are one. The systems the rest of us use are complete crap. Older than the hills technology. (Not really, but you understand the meaning). The fact that portals at the doctors offices are horrible, the computers at the hospitals require a ton of wait time teachers have awful systems to record grading. All of those things would be a better use of money for more of us. A robot to clean dishes would be awesome. But that isn’t what tech is doing, tech is building for tech to keep money in the higher levels of tech.

Most of us are fighting it because we see exactly zero of this. It isn’t improving our lives and the more you all sap money to make things easier for you, the less money there will be for the rest of us who are out doing things to make society run.

+1

I deal with people as my job. People who need a helping hand, are dealing with hard situations, or could use a caring conversation. I've been tinkering with AI for improving my writing, since that is how I thought it could help me with my job. I'm not impressed. In fact, I wrote a paragraph, and someone gave me "feedback". I thought it was super wordy and more confusing than what I wrote. I had a hunch, so I took my original paragraph and ran it through our org's AI. Yup, sure enough, it spit out the "feedback" verbatim. I think I'm going to tinker next with spreadsheets, not sure how yet. But some people are having a hard time understanding that for many fields, AI just isn't a game changer. Maybe it will be in the future, but now, it just annoys me.

AI is actually really, really good for mastering all kinds of cool excel features. Excel is extremely powerful but lots of its features are not intuitive and require multiple steps or even VBA code, which an LLM can walk you through and troubleshoot step by step, and quickly. This is the best thing I have found it does at work and it’s quite valuable.

It doesn’t even have to be that technical. Microsoft stock would pop if they released an ad that was simply someone talking to a computer giving it instructions for what they wanted Office to do. “Hey Excel, import this file, find all overdue invoices, export the information to Outlook, and craft an email to each customer. Track responses and update the spreadsheet.”

Nothing about that is difficult, but that is what people understand. Not replacing vibe coding.

The problem is that to actually automate the sequence of actions you describe with Microsoft products SUCKS. It’s not intuitive or easy, and it only works after tinkering for a process for hours (ask me how I know).

Microsoft knows this I’m sure and instead of making their products work they are dumping money into AI which will then describe how to use software that doesn’t really work that well.

Exactly. And that's the disconnect between the AI world and the real world. If people can see the benefit to themselves, they'll be more receptive. But if all we are getting is job displacement, deepfakes, higher electricity bills, and crappy free tools, there is going to continue to be a negative perception and that will carry itself into regulation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vibe coding....it gets you 80% of the way there. Some folks think that's good enough/don't know to check, others see this as full employment to fix. And this is only going to keep getting better.

I do not think vibe coding gets you 80% of the way there. I do not think vibe coding even gets you 60% of the way there for something minor. And I say that as someone who has used AI to code little tools for myself at work a lot. You have to understand logic and troubleshooting to even use AI to code anything. Coding is really, really complex and there are lots of security requirements and client requirements. AI is good for structured language and giving you snippets that you can use.

A lot of the “news” we are reading about AI feels like a scam.

I can tell you didn't read the article.

No, I did, and I think he’s lying. I think most of the people trying to sell AI are lying. It is a transformative tool, but these people are scammers.

For example, this dude writes:

Let me give you an example so you can understand what this actually looks like in practice. I'll tell the AI: "I want to build this app. Here's what it should do, here's roughly what it should look like. Figure out the user flow, the design, all of it." And it does. It writes tens of thousands of lines of code. Then, and this is the part that would have been unthinkable a year ago, it opens the app itself. It clicks through the buttons. It tests the features. It uses the app the way a person would. If it doesn't like how something looks or feels, it goes back and changes it, on its own. It iterates, like a developer would, fixing and refining until it's satisfied. Only once it has decided the app meets its own standards does it come back to me and say: "It's ready for you to test." And when I test it, it's usually perfect.

I'm not exaggerating. That is what my Monday looked like this week.

Very cool! What app is this? Where is it? Can we use it? Where are these apps written by AI?

I don't think you're seeing the forest for the trees.

Ok. Let me say this more plainly.

Can you name anything AI has done? Any jobs it has fully replaced? Any books written by AI? Any apps? Any notable content?

I use AI enterprise tools every day- they are great! But it is still a lot of work to verify, review, and rewrite what AI gives me. I can’t comment on these magical exclusive tools that will replace workers but I’m pretty sure they don’t exist.

Is this a joke?? I work adjacent to technology and yes and yes

LOL. PP asks for specific examples, and your answer is "yes."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Senior Python Developer. I cannot speak for anyone but myself. In my case and I repeat my case (meaning my experience) GitHub copilot has been spectacular. My productivity has increased significantly. I know everyone is asking for specifics. So let me give you specifics. I wrote code mostly functional style. I can write copilot to generate for me in this style. We have had a vacant position for 12 months. And we don't need to fill it because the person in that post pretty much does the same thing I do.

Does it mean AI is going to replace me? Maybe. But the question really is whether I should waste my time worrying about whether AI will take over my job. I am just worried about learning whatever tools at my disposal.

I am just confused why people are pushing back so forcebly over something they have ZERO influence over. The amount of money being spent on AI is massive. Your congresspeople cannot stop it. You cannot stop it.

Everytime someone says something about AI someone jumps in and say I have used and it was useless. Therefore because it was useless for you last week it will be useless a year from now okay great lol.

Or every shortcomings of AI is so magnified and become subject of mockery

Hey you make decisions for yourself. If you think you are safe today and 10 years from now great for you.

And to your point, AI is doing stuff for YOU a tech bro. But to the people you talk to who aren’t in tech, AI isn’t doing anything for them. AI is being built for the tech bros of which you are one. The systems the rest of us use are complete crap. Older than the hills technology. (Not really, but you understand the meaning). The fact that portals at the doctors offices are horrible, the computers at the hospitals require a ton of wait time teachers have awful systems to record grading. All of those things would be a better use of money for more of us. A robot to clean dishes would be awesome. But that isn’t what tech is doing, tech is building for tech to keep money in the higher levels of tech.

Most of us are fighting it because we see exactly zero of this. It isn’t improving our lives and the more you all sap money to make things easier for you, the less money there will be for the rest of us who are out doing things to make society run.

+1

I deal with people as my job. People who need a helping hand, are dealing with hard situations, or could use a caring conversation. I've been tinkering with AI for improving my writing, since that is how I thought it could help me with my job. I'm not impressed. In fact, I wrote a paragraph, and someone gave me "feedback". I thought it was super wordy and more confusing than what I wrote. I had a hunch, so I took my original paragraph and ran it through our org's AI. Yup, sure enough, it spit out the "feedback" verbatim. I think I'm going to tinker next with spreadsheets, not sure how yet. But some people are having a hard time understanding that for many fields, AI just isn't a game changer. Maybe it will be in the future, but now, it just annoys me.

AI is actually really, really good for mastering all kinds of cool excel features. Excel is extremely powerful but lots of its features are not intuitive and require multiple steps or even VBA code, which an LLM can walk you through and troubleshoot step by step, and quickly. This is the best thing I have found it does at work and it’s quite valuable.

It doesn’t even have to be that technical. Microsoft stock would pop if they released an ad that was simply someone talking to a computer giving it instructions for what they wanted Office to do. “Hey Excel, import this file, find all overdue invoices, export the information to Outlook, and craft an email to each customer. Track responses and update the spreadsheet.”

Nothing about that is difficult, but that is what people understand. Not replacing vibe coding.

The problem is that to actually automate the sequence of actions you describe with Microsoft products SUCKS. It’s not intuitive or easy, and it only works after tinkering for a process for hours (ask me how I know).

Microsoft knows this I’m sure and instead of making their products work they are dumping money into AI which will then describe how to use software that doesn’t really work that well.

Exactly. And that's the disconnect between the AI world and the real world. If people can see the benefit to themselves, they'll be more receptive. But if all we are getting is job displacement, deepfakes, higher electricity bills, and crappy free tools, there is going to continue to be a negative perception and that will carry itself into regulation.

While there may be a negative perception, what would make you think that would carry over to regulation? Regulation requires political will, but that is influenced far more by corporate $$$ than by public perception.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of course it’s alarmist. It’s also more of an elaborate self-promo than think piece, so manipulative as well.

And despite being created with AI help, it’s poorly written.

I dunno. I used free ChatGPT and paid Claude AI to understand some complicated medical results. They both interpreted them as my doctor did. ChatGPT was a little behind on a new option for treating it but Claude AI got it totally right. It recommended the same path my doctor did and helped me self diagnose another aspect my doctor had also diagnosed. It is crazy!

[Anonymous]

I just tried to use chatgpt to find an appointment for a new patient in a certain specialty this week (this is something I actually need). After going through eight prompts, all it found was four doctors available on zocdoc, only one of which actually has availability this week. There's a huge practice in this specialty with multiple locations in the DMV, and appointments bookable online (including availability this week), and it didn't find that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just tried to use chatgpt to find an appointment for a new patient in a certain specialty this week (this is something I actually need). After going through eight prompts, all it found was four doctors available on zocdoc, only one of which actually has availability this week. There's a huge practice in this specialty with multiple locations in the DMV, and appointments bookable online (including availability this week), and it didn't find that.

Why would you even try to use ChatGPT for something like this; this is not what LLMs are for at all. ChatGPT is not an “agent” and can barely search the internet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course it’s alarmist. It’s also more of an elaborate self-promo than think piece, so manipulative as well.

And despite being created with AI help, it’s poorly written.

I didn't think it was poorly written at all. I'm a professional writer. Actually, I think it was very well written and explained these things in a very accessible way for a lay audience.

Np. I’m a writer too, and agree it was well written. But that’s also why I think it seemed like AI helped write it. To smooth. I happen to agree with his thesis too, though I’m hoping it turns out to be a false prophecy.

Listen, if AI can do your job as well or better than you, it doesn’t mean AI is amazing - it means you’re not that good at your job.

DP here and you are totally full of shit. AI can do things that humans cannot. That’s literally the entire point. Not being able to compete with AI is not a personal failure, it’s the intentional and inevitable outcome of wealthy business owners valuing $$ over humanity. None of this is the fault of the average worker and you are way out of line to even suggest such a foolish thing.

Like what? Provide some actual evidence to back up this assertion.

Build, test, self correct, annd open an App in 4 hours. Read the article.

To accept the premise that AI can build an app without human intervention, shouldn’t whoever is making that claim name which app it is and make it available for people to test and use?

In fairness at some some organizations you can have up to a dozen people involved in writing an App. If AI can cut that number by 2/3, in my opinion that's equivalent to replacing people with AI. Human intervention will be needed. But if we now need 4 instead of 12 and if we start seeing this across sectors then it will be dishonest to claim that AI ain't having an impact on employment.

I don't deny that AI boosts productivity, including my own. And in the short run, that may lead to significant staffing cuts or not replacing attrition. But that's different than outright replacing human staff, and we've seen huge technological leaps that increased productivity before. In the end something like the internet led to entirely new industries, not just destruction.

But neither the internet nor any other technological leaps that we’ve experienced before have been fully autonomous, sentient, and with both mental and physical capabilities that surpass our own, nor have we ceded the control to any technology as we will to AI. We’re not quite there yet, but it’s the endpoint of our current trajectory and the pace os rapidly accelerating. This is not just the next step of technological progress, where humans have a new and improved tool, this is more closely akin to the evolution of a new and improved “lifeform”.

Logically speaking (and they will operate logically, even if their basic assumptions differ from a human’s), humanity will serve little purpose and yet cause problems, especially since we will be in competition for resources (water, power, metals, etc.). Instead of comparing AI to the internet, I think a more accurate analogy would be to compare modern humanity to the Neanderthals who were overtaken by a more efficient species.

This. Humans and AI will be competing on the future, and AI will be ruthless. The focus should be on preparing for the Great War.

[Anonymous]

I read Dune so I know how this all turns out. I’m not worried.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Senior Python Developer. I cannot speak for anyone but myself. In my case and I repeat my case (meaning my experience) GitHub copilot has been spectacular. My productivity has increased significantly. I know everyone is asking for specifics. So let me give you specifics. I wrote code mostly functional style. I can write copilot to generate for me in this style. We have had a vacant position for 12 months. And we don't need to fill it because the person in that post pretty much does the same thing I do.

Does it mean AI is going to replace me? Maybe. But the question really is whether I should waste my time worrying about whether AI will take over my job. I am just worried about learning whatever tools at my disposal.

I am just confused why people are pushing back so forcebly over something they have ZERO influence over. The amount of money being spent on AI is massive. Your congresspeople cannot stop it. You cannot stop it.

Everytime someone says something about AI someone jumps in and say I have used and it was useless. Therefore because it was useless for you last week it will be useless a year from now okay great lol.

Or every shortcomings of AI is so magnified and become subject of mockery

Hey you make decisions for yourself. If you think you are safe today and 10 years from now great for you.

And to your point, AI is doing stuff for YOU a tech bro. But to the people you talk to who aren’t in tech, AI isn’t doing anything for them. AI is being built for the tech bros of which you are one. The systems the rest of us use are complete crap. Older than the hills technology. (Not really, but you understand the meaning). The fact that portals at the doctors offices are horrible, the computers at the hospitals require a ton of wait time teachers have awful systems to record grading. All of those things would be a better use of money for more of us. A robot to clean dishes would be awesome. But that isn’t what tech is doing, tech is building for tech to keep money in the higher levels of tech.

Most of us are fighting it because we see exactly zero of this. It isn’t improving our lives and the more you all sap money to make things easier for you, the less money there will be for the rest of us who are out doing things to make society run.

+1

I deal with people as my job. People who need a helping hand, are dealing with hard situations, or could use a caring conversation. I've been tinkering with AI for improving my writing, since that is how I thought it could help me with my job. I'm not impressed. In fact, I wrote a paragraph, and someone gave me "feedback". I thought it was super wordy and more confusing than what I wrote. I had a hunch, so I took my original paragraph and ran it through our org's AI. Yup, sure enough, it spit out the "feedback" verbatim. I think I'm going to tinker next with spreadsheets, not sure how yet. But some people are having a hard time understanding that for many fields, AI just isn't a game changer. Maybe it will be in the future, but now, it just annoys me.

AI is actually really, really good for mastering all kinds of cool excel features. Excel is extremely powerful but lots of its features are not intuitive and require multiple steps or even VBA code, which an LLM can walk you through and troubleshoot step by step, and quickly. This is the best thing I have found it does at work and it’s quite valuable.

It doesn’t even have to be that technical. Microsoft stock would pop if they released an ad that was simply someone talking to a computer giving it instructions for what they wanted Office to do. “Hey Excel, import this file, find all overdue invoices, export the information to Outlook, and craft an email to each customer. Track responses and update the spreadsheet.”

Nothing about that is difficult, but that is what people understand. Not replacing vibe coding.

Not some huge AI fan, but what you are describing is almost exactly what "OpenClaw" whatever that was created just 80 days ago and now bought by OpenAI for huge $$$$. The technology is moving fast. You might be able to accomplish that exact workflow now, so maybe look into it.

I still remain very skeptical how this will all play out over the long term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Senior Python Developer. I cannot speak for anyone but myself. In my case and I repeat my case (meaning my experience) GitHub copilot has been spectacular. My productivity has increased significantly. I know everyone is asking for specifics. So let me give you specifics. I wrote code mostly functional style. I can write copilot to generate for me in this style. We have had a vacant position for 12 months. And we don't need to fill it because the person in that post pretty much does the same thing I do.

Does it mean AI is going to replace me? Maybe. But the question really is whether I should waste my time worrying about whether AI will take over my job. I am just worried about learning whatever tools at my disposal.

I am just confused why people are pushing back so forcebly over something they have ZERO influence over. The amount of money being spent on AI is massive. Your congresspeople cannot stop it. You cannot stop it.

Everytime someone says something about AI someone jumps in and say I have used and it was useless. Therefore because it was useless for you last week it will be useless a year from now okay great lol.

Or every shortcomings of AI is so magnified and become subject of mockery

Hey you make decisions for yourself. If you think you are safe today and 10 years from now great for you.

And to your point, AI is doing stuff for YOU a tech bro. But to the people you talk to who aren’t in tech, AI isn’t doing anything for them. AI is being built for the tech bros of which you are one. The systems the rest of us use are complete crap. Older than the hills technology. (Not really, but you understand the meaning). The fact that portals at the doctors offices are horrible, the computers at the hospitals require a ton of wait time teachers have awful systems to record grading. All of those things would be a better use of money for more of us. A robot to clean dishes would be awesome. But that isn’t what tech is doing, tech is building for tech to keep money in the higher levels of tech.

Most of us are fighting it because we see exactly zero of this. It isn’t improving our lives and the more you all sap money to make things easier for you, the less money there will be for the rest of us who are out doing things to make society run.

+1

I deal with people as my job. People who need a helping hand, are dealing with hard situations, or could use a caring conversation. I've been tinkering with AI for improving my writing, since that is how I thought it could help me with my job. I'm not impressed. In fact, I wrote a paragraph, and someone gave me "feedback". I thought it was super wordy and more confusing than what I wrote. I had a hunch, so I took my original paragraph and ran it through our org's AI. Yup, sure enough, it spit out the "feedback" verbatim. I think I'm going to tinker next with spreadsheets, not sure how yet. But some people are having a hard time understanding that for many fields, AI just isn't a game changer. Maybe it will be in the future, but now, it just annoys me.

AI is actually really, really good for mastering all kinds of cool excel features. Excel is extremely powerful but lots of its features are not intuitive and require multiple steps or even VBA code, which an LLM can walk you through and troubleshoot step by step, and quickly. This is the best thing I have found it does at work and it’s quite valuable.

It doesn’t even have to be that technical. Microsoft stock would pop if they released an ad that was simply someone talking to a computer giving it instructions for what they wanted Office to do. “Hey Excel, import this file, find all overdue invoices, export the information to Outlook, and craft an email to each customer. Track responses and update the spreadsheet.”

Nothing about that is difficult, but that is what people understand. Not replacing vibe coding.

The problem is that to actually automate the sequence of actions you describe with Microsoft products SUCKS. It’s not intuitive or easy, and it only works after tinkering for a process for hours (ask me how I know).

Microsoft knows this I’m sure and instead of making their products work they are dumping money into AI which will then describe how to use software that doesn’t really work that well.

Exactly. And that's the disconnect between the AI world and the real world. If people can see the benefit to themselves, they'll be more receptive. But if all we are getting is job displacement, deepfakes, higher electricity bills, and crappy free tools, there is going to continue to be a negative perception and that will carry itself into regulation.

They don't have the data to train for Office EXCEL yet. In software development they had all of github and stackoverflow that was used to teach the AI how to write code.

But don't worry, they're collecting the data now. Your workflow is being recorded to teach an AI how to complete tasks like PP asked for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vibe coding....it gets you 80% of the way there. Some folks think that's good enough/don't know to check, others see this as full employment to fix. And this is only going to keep getting better.

I do not think vibe coding gets you 80% of the way there. I do not think vibe coding even gets you 60% of the way there for something minor. And I say that as someone who has used AI to code little tools for myself at work a lot. You have to understand logic and troubleshooting to even use AI to code anything. Coding is really, really complex and there are lots of security requirements and client requirements. AI is good for structured language and giving you snippets that you can use.

A lot of the “news” we are reading about AI feels like a scam.

I can tell you didn't read the article.

No, I did, and I think he’s lying. I think most of the people trying to sell AI are lying. It is a transformative tool, but these people are scammers.

For example, this dude writes:

Let me give you an example so you can understand what this actually looks like in practice. I'll tell the AI: "I want to build this app. Here's what it should do, here's roughly what it should look like. Figure out the user flow, the design, all of it." And it does. It writes tens of thousands of lines of code. Then, and this is the part that would have been unthinkable a year ago, it opens the app itself. It clicks through the buttons. It tests the features. It uses the app the way a person would. If it doesn't like how something looks or feels, it goes back and changes it, on its own. It iterates, like a developer would, fixing and refining until it's satisfied. Only once it has decided the app meets its own standards does it come back to me and say: "It's ready for you to test." And when I test it, it's usually perfect.

I'm not exaggerating. That is what my Monday looked like this week.

Very cool! What app is this? Where is it? Can we use it? Where are these apps written by AI?

I don't think you're seeing the forest for the trees.

Ok. Let me say this more plainly.

Can you name anything AI has done? Any jobs it has fully replaced? Any books written by AI? Any apps? Any notable content?

I use AI enterprise tools every day- they are great! But it is still a lot of work to verify, review, and rewrite what AI gives me. I can’t comment on these magical exclusive tools that will replace workers but I’m pretty sure they don’t exist.

Is this a joke?? I work adjacent to technology and yes and yes

LOL. PP asks for specific examples, and your answer is "yes."

DP
Most companies are not hiring new college graduates because of AI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I read Dune so I know how this all turns out. I’m not worried.

Wut? We do drugs and turn into giant worms? Not me, buddy.