←back to thread

Andrej Karpathy: Software in the era of AI [video]

(www.youtube.com)
1481 points sandslash | 1 comments | 19 Jun 25 00:33 UTC | HN request time: 0.232s | source
Show context
gchamonlive ◴[19 Jun 25 01:31 UTC] No.44314670[source]▶
I think it's interesting to juxtapose traditional coding, neural network weights and prompts because in many areas -- like the example of the self driving module having code being replaced by neural networks tuned to the target dataset representing the domain -- this will be quite useful.

However I think it's important to make it clear that given the hardware constraints of many environments the applicability of what's being called software 2.0 and 3.0 will be severely limited.

So instead of being replacements, these paradigms are more like extra tools in the tool belt. Code and prompts will live side by side, being used when convenient, but none a panacea.

replies(4): >>44315052 #>>44316337 #>>44322007 #>>44323973 #
karpathy ◴[19 Jun 25 02:58 UTC] No.44315052[source]▶
I kind of say it in words (agreeing with you) but I agree the versioning is a bit confusing analogy because it usually additionally implies some kind of improvement. When I’m just trying to distinguish them as very different software categories.
replies(5): >>44315296 #>>44319138 #>>44319445 #>>44320206 #>>44320915 #
1. gchamonlive ◴[19 Jun 25 17:50 UTC] No.44320915[source]▶
> versioning is a bit confusing analogy because it usually additionally implies some kind of improvement

Exactly what I felt. Semver like naming analogies bring their own set of implicit meanings, like major versions having to necessarily supersede or replace the previous version, that is, it doesn't account for coexistence further than planning migration paths. This expectation however doesn't correspond with the rest of the talk, so I thought I might point it out. Thanks for taking the time to reply!