←back to thread

A Research Preview of Codex

(openai.com)
511 points meetpateltech | 4 comments | 16 May 25 15:02 UTC | HN request time: 0.676s | source
Show context
nadis ◴[16 May 25 17:52 UTC] No.44008123[source]▶
In the preview video, I appreciated Katy Shi's comment on "I think this is a reflection of where engineering work has moved over the past where a lot of my time now is spent reviewing code rather than writing it."

Preview video from Open AI: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhdpnbfH6NU&t=878s

As I think about what "AI-native" or just the future of building software loos like, its interesting to me that - right now - developers are still just reading code and tests rather than looking at simulations.

While a new(ish) concept for software development, simulations could provide a wider range of outcomes and, especially for the front end, are far easier to evaluate than just code/tests alone. I'm biased because this is something I've been exploring but it really hit me over the head looking at the Codex launch materials.

replies(5): >>44008199 #>>44010123 #>>44012135 #>>44012584 #>>44012926 #
1. fosterfriends ◴[16 May 25 21:56 UTC] No.44010123[source]▶
++ Kind of my whole thesis with Graphite. As more code gets AI-generated, the weight shifts to review, testing, and integration. Even as someone helping build AI code reviewers, we'll _need_ humans stamping forever - for many reasons, but fundamentally for accountability. A computer can never be held accountable

https://constelisvoss.com/pages/a-computer-can-never-be-held...

replies(2): >>44010360 #>>44036211 #
2. hintymad ◴[16 May 25 22:32 UTC] No.44010360[source]▶
> A computer can never be held accountable

I think the issue is not about humans being entirely replaced. Instead, the issue is that if AI replaces enough number of knowledge workers while there's no new or expanded market to absorb the workforce, the new balance of supply and demand will mean that many of us will have suppressed pay or worse, losing our jobs forever.

replies(1): >>44014269 #
3. TeMPOraL ◴[17 May 25 13:40 UTC] No.44014269[source]▶
That is true regardless of whether there is or isn't a "new or expanded market to absorb the workforce".

It's a crucial insight that's usually missed or eluded in discussions about automation and workforce - unless you're literally at the beginning of your career, losing your career to automation screws you over big time, forever. At best, you'll have to downsize your entire lifestyle, and that of your family, to be commensurate with your now entry-level pay. If you're halfway through the career that suddenly ended, you won't recover.

All the new jobs and markets are for the kids. Mind you, not your kids - your kids are going to be disadvantaged by their household being suddenly thrown into financial insecurity or downright poverty, and may not even get a chance to start a good career path with their peers.

That, not "anti technology sentiment", is why Luddites smashed the looms. Those were people who got rug-pulled by business decisions and thrown into poverty, along with their families and communities.

4. nadis ◴[19 May 25 23:44 UTC] No.44036211[source]▶
> A computer can never be held accountable

I feel like I've been thinking along similar lines recently (due to re-read this though!) but instead of "computer" am replacing it with "AI" or "Agents" these days. Same point holds true.