you are overestimating the skill of code review. Some people have very specific ways of writing code and solving problems which are not aligned what LLMs wrote, but doesn't mean it's wrong.

I know senior developers that are very radical on some nonsense patterns they think are much better than others. If they see code that don't follow them, they say it's trash.

Even so, you can guide the LLM to write the code as you like.

And you are wrong, it's a lot on how people write the prompt.

> you are overestimating the skill of code review.

“You are overestimating the skill of [reading, comprehending, and critically assessing code of a non-guaranteed quality]” is an absurd statement if you properly expand out what “code review” means.

I don’t care if you code review the CSS file for the Bojangles online menu web page, but you better be code reviewing the firmware for my dad’s pacemaker.

This whole back and forth with LLM-generated code makes me think that the marginal utility of a lot of code the strong proponents write is <1¢. If I fuck up my code, it costs our partners $200/hr per false alert, which obliterates the profit margin of using our software in the first place.

By far most of the code LLMs write is for crappy crud apps and webapps not pacemakers and rockets

We can capture enough reliability on what LLMs produce there by guided integration tests and UX tests along with code review and using other LLMs to review along with other strategies to prvent semantic and code drift

Do you know how much crap wordpress ,drupal and Joomla sites I have seen?

Just that work can be automated away

But Ive also worked in high end and mission critical delivery and more formal verification etc - that’s just moving the goalposts on what AI can do- it will get there eventually

Last year you all here were arguing AI Couldn’t code - now everyone has moved the goalposts to formal high end and mission critical ops- yes when money matters we humans are still needed of course - no one denying that- its the utility of the sole human developer against the onslaught of machine aided coding

This profession is changing rapidly- people are stuck in denial

> that’s just moving the goalposts on what AI can do- it will get there eventually

This is the nutshell of your argument. I’m not convinced. Technologies often hit a ceiling of utility.

Imagine a “progress curve” for every technology, x-axis time and y-axis utility. Not every progress curve is limitlessly exponential, or even linear - in fact, very few are. I would venture to guess that most technological progress actually mimics population growth curves, where a ceiling is hit based on fundamental restrictions like resource availability, and then either stabilizes or crashes.

I don’t think LLMs are the AI endgame. They definitely have utility, but I think your argument boils down to a bold prediction of limitless progress of a specific technology (LLMs), even though that’s quite rare historically.

I agree that LLM architecture might hit a ceiling (although the trajectory is still upward at present) but I meant Deep Learning in general

I do think there is a great deal of VC baiting hype in statements by Dario and Altman about ai coding but at the same time the progress has indeed been positive

We've finally proven or unlocked the secret to learning in machines - the only question is how fast that progress curve is - yes it might get stuck for a few years but I think this is really an inflection point that we’ve reached with these technologies

very interested in this approach and many other people are for sure. Please do a blog post.

I'm very very sure. Based on my last 15 years of coding experience I can assist fairly accurate how much a task takes. With AI I can finish the task 2x-4x faster (this includes testing, edge case handling etc).

your argument becomes equals to 0 once you involve your personal feelings

Why?

it's a business, why he should keep people if company doesn't need them? A business is not a charity

I am not saying that he should. He is pretending that his hand was forced. I am saying that it wasn't. He made a choice. You may say that it is the rational choice, but that is a different debate.

a company's purpoe is profits not being a socialist scheme to support people

why?

Because that's not independent verification that the device tested actually _is_ a solid state battery. Just that whatever was tested had certain charging characteristics.

Tbh the exciting part isn’t so much the composition but whether it can actually meet the claimed performance. It could be made of wet gym socks for all I care if it can do 100k charge cycles at 90degC with comparable energy density and specific power to LiFePO.

But that’s the point I’m making. You’re taking the claims that Donut Labs is making about it being a new type of battery at face value. Having someone verify charging characteristics isn’t that helpful without simultaneously verifying that the battery actually is what they’re claiming.

How is he taking it at face value? He’s saying it doesn’t matter. Which it really doesn’t.

The reason solid state is exciting is the promised high energy density, and in some cases better safety. We shouldn’t care if it’s really “solid state” or not. That’s just marketing fluff. It doesn’t even really have a good definition as some chemistries are somewhere in between (sometimes described as semi-solid state).

This test confirms the charging speed and basically confirms the energy density (estimates people have done based on the video/report put it in the ballpark of what’s claimed)

You and I should really not demand a test that it’s actually solid state. That just doesn’t matter. We need energy density tests, cycle life tests, puncture tests, etc. If all those specifications are confirmed, whether it’s solid state or not becomes completely moot.

And in the end what truly matters is if it can be mass manufactured at low cost, which can’t be tested anyway. All these social media demands for tests are kind of ridiculous, since the only thing publishing the tests does is give Donut more PR. They’re basically laughing all the way to the bank considering how easy it has been to manipulate YouTube, Reddit and HackerNews into giving them free press. We will have another round in a week when the next test is published. I’m honestly impressed.

Personally I reserve all judgement until the promised bikes are on the road and torn down by third parties.

moderation acts only on bad worded posts, but not the meaning of them

That's normal, but I'm referring to toxic behaviour like insults and extreme views.

For example, why is this comment getting down voted? Lol.