Until people start including “short sleeper” in their online dating profiles because it’s actually helping them get matches, it’s not going to make a difference.

“Learn to coal bro 🤓”… -average Redditor in 5 years.

It's quite frustrating that all that time and money have gone to waste. :-(

[removed]

Lol. Have you run out of things to say? Why don't you employ your logic and reasoning for once.

Lets see:

Humans, when presented with a prompt, produce a response using their neural network, based on training they have received.

LLMs, when presented with a prompt, produce a response using their neural network, based on training they have received.

We do not know in detail how the brain works, though we know how neurons work.

We do not know in detail how the LLMs works, though we know how the GPUs work.

Fact: In most cases it is difficult to differentiate between the output of an average human vs a LLM, and in many cases the output from humans are worse, which is why they find great utility in LLMs like ChatGPT.

LLMs, similar to children, still have deficits in symbolic computation, but developers are making progress in that area.

Conclusion: Little Ninja is no different to a pile of silicon.

BTW I tested ChatGPT's deductive skills:

> Children do not believe LLMs can reason. Little Ninja is a child. What conclusion can we draw? Please lay out your thoughts step by step.

ChatGPT:

> The premise states that "Children do not believe LLMs can reason."

> Little Ninja is a child.

> Therefore, based on the given information, we can conclude that Little Ninja may not believe that LLMs can reason.

Or how about an example not including little ninja.

Q: South Africa is at the southern tip of Africa. Chile is at the southern tip of South America. Both countries are far away from the equator. The further you get from the equator, the colder you are. What can you conclude about the climate of South Africa and Chile.

A: Based on the given information, we can conclude that both South Africa and Chile are located far away from the equator, and the statement "the further you get from the equator, the colder you are" suggests that these countries are likely to have colder climates compared to countries located closer to the equator. However, we cannot make any specific conclusions about the climates of South Africa and Chile beyond this generalization, as climate is influenced by a wide range of factors such as altitude, ocean currents, and prevailing winds, which can vary from region to region within a country. Therefore, further information about specific regions within South Africa and Chile would be needed to make more detailed conclusions about their climates.

Or:

Q: South Africa is at the southern tip of Africa. Brazil is in South America and closer to the equator. The further you get from the equator, the colder you are. Which country is warmer and which is colder.

A: Based on the given information and the known relationship between distance from the equator and temperature, we can conclude that Brazil is likely to be warmer than South Africa. This is because Brazil is located closer to the equator than South Africa, meaning that the angle of incidence of the sun's rays is more direct and the sunlight is more concentrated, resulting in more heat energy reaching the surface.

Aw you're getting all worked up lol just go back and read the previous responses a little slower again maybe at some point you'll pick up the point again

> The LLM needed to be prompted pretty specifically in the correct direction.

And children have to be taught. ChatGPT5 will have this natively built in.

> It's not reasoning on its own merits and its still generating text based on a statistical distribution of next likely characters rather than examining the problem and formulating an answer then producing the response.

Look here little man, do I have to demonstrate again you have no idea what is actually going on inside the black-box of the 96 layers of chatGPT? I guess if you are slow I might have to.

> rather than examining the problem and formulating an answer then producing the response

Again, you are obviously not examining the problem before you are formulating your response. Why don't you try it a bit and see where you get. Take that as a challenge.

Interesting paper but you still miss the point. The LLM needed to be prompted pretty specifically in the correct direction. It's not reasoning on its own merits and its still generating text based on a statistical distribution of next likely characters rather than examining the problem and formulating an answer then producing the response. A slight difference above your ability to comprehend, but one day you'll get there champ.

Hate to break it to you lil guy but just reposting articles on futurology doesn't make you intelligent

The answer is yes. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow but it will happen. I'm not the most tech savvy person, but if businesses can find any way at all to not pay an employee a proper wage to do something they will do it.

Already people in the tech sector have their jobs replaced by programmers in lower wage countries, this is just the next step.

I envision a nightmare hellscape job where a living, breathing programmer, has to spend their days fixing AI generated code because some nerd in accounting determined it was cheaper than doing it right the first time.

As the AI gets better at coding, less humans will be needed to fix the coding.

The following submission statement was provided by /u/Charlotte_D_Katakuri:

Recent advances in deep learning and generative AI, such as ChatGPT, are receiving a lot of attention, and are getting better every year. Some programmers are already using ChatGPT to automate parts of their jobs. ChatGPT in its current form can already write simple code for you. Will this mean programmers will be replaced soon?

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11qb0g1/will_ai_replace_programmers/jc25rpa/

> A NN will never be able to logically reason by way of deduction.

See, what you don't appear to understand, being somewhat below average intelligence, is that deductive reasoning is not native to humans and has to be taught.

Using simple Chain of Thought prompting deductive reasoning is much improved in LLMs.

I hate to break it to you, little ninja, but you are not that much better than ChatGPT.

Both. AI will be able to partition what needs/"wants" updates and do it faster on the fly but will also write better programming that does not need as much fixing.

former coders should learn how to mine coal

Until it does and everyone is told to retrain again with: "just go into the trades bro, AI can't fix a pipe"

Unless we've significant technology breakthrough, AI will only serve as amplifier tools for people.

Even if you specify the requirements very carefully, it often still gives you codes/scripts which can't even compile/run. So at least you still need to debug, add the parts which the AI missed, rewrite the ridiculously wrong codes/scripts, and maybe return the final codes/scripts to the AI to clean up.

Throwing things back and forth, maybe it still saves you time, but absolutely not like an autopilot.

Absolutely terrible idea, Chat GPT is not a safe place for children to be parented. Just read about what in restricted AI interactions have happened over chat GPT and/or similar AIs and you’ll get a sense of how unsafe it is. Maybe with considerable development and strict moderation, but it will never be a substitute for human support.

I have a programmer friend who says he uses ChatGPT to do 5-10% of his job now

No.

This here is the text I need to get past the censor bots for "no" not being a long enough answer despite the fact that the question unequivocally and obviously can be answered with a succinct and unambiguous "no". Really such clickbait titles should be banned from this sub based on the rules for discussion here but I digress as I feel that I have already made my point.

I assume it will be the same as working as an operator. The AI will do the programming with human instructions, and a human has to verify the result before releasing/using it.

Go to a farm and you'll still find people doing hard physical work, because there are things that are too hard to automate or not worth the cost. Some programmers will be out of work, but those that learn to use the tools will be more productive (until AI becomes AGI and then we are all unemployed).

[removed]

Says the moron who thinks humans lack the ability to reason deductively lol

Maybe if I explain it more simply for you. A NN will never be able to logically reason by way of deduction. This is due to the very nature of its design which is simply a device that takes input data and generates an output mathematical equation. The only way to get a good model is by viewing lots and lots of data. This is statistical inference since you don't seem to know what that is. There's no inner monologue happening within the computer. No intelligence is required at all to simply take data input and run it through a model. NNs take a small important slice of what the human brain is doing but clearly don't capture the whole picture otherwise we'd already have AGI based on NNs and we dont.

Recent advances in deep learning and generative AI, such as ChatGPT, are receiving a lot of attention, and are getting better every year. Some programmers are already using ChatGPT to automate parts of their jobs. ChatGPT in its current form can already write simple code for you. Will this mean programmers will be replaced soon?

My loyalty requires the answer to this: Will AI do more or less frequent software updates? 🤣 Seriously though I think AI will be a powerful tool for programmers.

> Humans are able to logically reason by deduction rather than inference.

This is mostly not true lol. For example, I detect a distinct lack of reasoning and logic on your part lol.

So clearly that is not the case, because if you were actually thinking you would see the resemblance and equivalence between how the human brain works and the NN in LLMs.