upvote

points

by mcmcmc6 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby natpalmer17765 hours ago|
next
[-]
It’s a brave new world.

I recall hearing similar sentiments from linux sysadmins regarding cloud infrastructure. In many respects they were and continue to be correct. In other respects, the world doesn’t care about the loss in understanding as long as things work “well enough” for the cogs of society to keep turning.

For those who do care (and have the aptitude) to understand things deeper there is always work to be had when “well enough” stops being good enough and someone has to unravel the “RDS queries are taking too long” problems that crop up as a result.

reply
upvoteby Schlagbohrer1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
These progressively higher levels of abstraction are how everything has moved and will move in science and human technology. There aren't enough hours in the day nor years in the human lifespan to gain a deep understanding of every single level below us. Rather we build on the abstracted API layer beneath us, and those who come after will build on top of us using a simplified abstraction to hide the tangled mess we had to make.
reply
upvoteby 9dev5 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
What an awful position to take. Tech used to be about becoming more accessible to people! Now we have a magical assistant to make computers do what you want with natural language, and your desire is gate keeping that so only programmers can use it to write software for themselves?
reply
upvoteby Certhas5 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
I am using many many many things that I don't understand. Cars, public transport, etc...

I review and test the end product, not every tiny step along the way. If the LLM uses some command line tools I have never heard of to create a model I can verify, why should I learn a tool that is completely irrelevant to my core expertise?

reply
upvoteby jason1cho4 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Many many people care more than the end product, for example whether a shirt is made of cotton with the forced labor, carbon emissions of public transport, etc.

In terms of engineering software, you care the cost. An intelligent agent may try to read unnecessary files and it's time to stop it to save tokens and avoid polluting the context.

reply
upvoteby 9dev21 minutes ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I can be against animal testing without being a chemist or having a full understanding of the experiments being made on them. Knowing it's cruelty is enough to make opposition a valid and defensible position.
reply
upvoteby user439282 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
I doubt that it is more efficient for someone to routinely watch every line of output or stop to review terminal commands, rather than waiting for the turn to complete.

It is a broader debate about agentic AI, and whether one should relinquish control to the tool rather than aim for full understanding of every action taken.

The people arguing for a hands-on, fully in control approach are losing ground by the week, in my opinion.

reply
upvoteby usef-3 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
He didn't advocate for being completely blind in every way. You might care about working conditions without understanding how the textiles, dyes or cotton production works.

These non-programmers probably shouldnt use computers at all, right, since they don't understand them?

reply