AI models are algorithms running on processors running at billions of calculations a second often scaled to hundreds of such processors. They're not intelligent. They're fast.
https://chatgpt.com/share/673b8c33-2ec8-8010-9f70-b0ed12a524...
Chat GPT can't directly execute code on my machine due to architectural limitations, but I imagine if I went and followed its instructions and told it what went wrong, it would correct it.
and that's just it, right? If i were to program this, I would be iterating. ChatGPT cannot do that because of how its architected (I don't think it would be hard to do this if you used the API and allowed some kind of tool use). However, if I told someone to go write me an S3 backend without ever executing it, and they came back with this... that would be great.
EDIT: with chunking: https://chatgpt.com/share/673b8c33-2ec8-8010-9f70-b0ed12a524...
IIRC, from another thread on this site, this is essentially how S3 is implemented (centralized metadata database that hashes out to nodes which implement a local storage mechanism -- MySQL I think).
Source: I had to implement R2 from scratch and nothing generated here would have helped me as even a starting point. And this isn't even getting to complex things like supporting arbitrarily large uploads and encrypting things while also supporting seeked downloads or multipart uploads.
[1] No one would ever do this for all sorts of problems including that you'd have all sorts of security problems with attackers sending you /../ to escape bucket and account isolation.
[2] No one would ever do this because you've got nothing more than a toy S3 server. A real S3 implementation needs to distribute the data to multiple locations so that availability is maintained in the face of isolated hardware and software failures.
Of course it wouldn't. You're a computer programmer. There's no point for you to use ChatGPT to do what you already know how to do.
> The implementation generated not only saves things directly to disk
There is nothing 'incorrect' about that, given my initial problem statement.
> Additionally, it makes a key mistake which is that uploading isn't a form but is the body of the request so it's already unable to have a real S3 client connect.
Again.. look at the prompt. I asked it to generate an object storage system, not an S3-compatible one.
It seems you're the one hallucinating.
EDIT: ChatGPT says: In short, the feedback likely stems from the implicit expectation of S3 API standards, and the discrepancy between that and the multipart form approach used in the code.
and
In summary, the expectation of S3 compatibility was a bias, and he should have recognized that the implementation was based on our explicitly discussed requirements, not the implicit ones he might have expected.
If it were more intelligent of course there would be. It would catch mistakes I wouldn't have thought about, it would output the work more quickly, etc. It's literally worse than if I'd assigned a junior engineer to do some of the legwork.
> ChatGPT says: In short, the feedback likely stems from the implicit expectation of S3 API standards, and the discrepancy between that and the multipart form approach used in the code. > In summary, the expectation of S3 compatibility was a bias, and he should have recognized that the implementation was based on our explicitly discussed requirements, not the implicit ones he might have expected
Now who's rationalizing. I was pretty clear in saying implement S3.
In general, I don't deny the fact that humans fall into common pitfalls, such as not reading the question. As I pointed out this is a common human failing, a 'hallucination' if you will. Nevertheless, my failing to deliver that to chatgpt should not count against chatgpt, but rather me, a humble human who recognizes my failings. And again, this furthers my point that people hallucinate regularly, we just have a social way to get around it -- what we're doing right now... discussion!