Comments by "" (@grokitall) on "GitHub Copilot Is Making Elite Developers EVEN BETTER" video.

  1. I doubt it, but you do not need them. If you look at history you can see multitudes of examples of new tech disrupting industries, and project that onto what effect real ai will have. Specialisation lead us away from being surfs, automation removed horses as primary power sources, and changed us from working near 18 hour days seven days per week towards the current 40 hour 5 day standard. Mechanisation also stopped us using 98 percent of the population for agriculture, moving most of them to easier, lower hour, better paying work. This lead to more office work, where wordprocessors and then computers killed both the typing pool and the secretarial pool, as bosses became empowered to do work that used to have to be devolved to secretaries. As computers have become more capable they have spawned multiple new industries with higher creative input, and that trend will continue, with both ai and,additive manufacturing only speeding up the process. The tricky bit is not having the industrial and work background change, but having the social, legal and ethical background move fast enough to keep up. When my grandfather was born, the majority of people still worked on the land with horses, we did not have powered flight, and the control systems for complex mechanical systems were cam shafts and simple feedback systems. When I was born, we had just stepped on the moon, computers had less power than a modern scientific calculator app on your smartphone, and everyone was trained at school on the assumption of a job for life. By the time I left school, it became obvious that the job for life assumption was on it's way out from the early seventies, and we needed to train people in school for lifelong learning instead, which a lot of countries still do not do. By the year 2000, it became clear that low wage low skilled work was not something to map your career around, and that you needed to continually work to upgrade your skills so that when you had to change career after less than 20 years, you had options for other, higher skilled and thus higher paid employment. Current ai is hamstrung by the fact that companies developing it are so pleased by the quantity of available data to train them with that they ignore all other considerations, and so the output is absolutely dreadful. If you take the gramarly app or plug in, it can be very good at spotting when you have typed in something which is garbage, but it can be hilariously bad at suggesting valid alternatives which don't mangle the meaning. It also is rubbish at the task given to schoolchildren to determine things like if you should use which or witch, or their, there or the're. Copilot makes even worse mistakes, as you use it wanting quality code, but the codebases it was trained upon have programmers with less than 5 years experience, due to the exponential growth of programming giving a doubling of the number of programmers every 5 years. It also does nothing to determine the license the code was released under, thereby encouraging piracy and similar legal problems, and even if you could get away with claiming that it was generated by copilot and approved by you, it is not usually committed to version control that way, leaving you without an audit trail to defend yourself. To the extent you do commit it that way, it is not copyrightable in the us, so your companies lawyers should be screaming at you not to use it for legal reasons. Because no attempt was made as a first step to create an ai to quantify how bad the code was, the output is typically at the level of the average inexperienced programmer, so again, it should not be accepted uncritically, as you would not do so from a new hire, so why let the ai contribute equally bad code? The potential of ai is enormous, but the current commercial methodology would get your project laughed out of any genuinely peer reviewed journal as anything but a proof of concept, and until they start using better methods with their ai projects there are a lot of good reasons to not let them near anything you care about in anything but a trivial manner. Also as long as a significant percentage of lawmakers are as incompetent as you typical magazine republican representative we have no chance of producing a legal framework which has any relationship to the needs of the industry, pushing development to less regulated and less desirable locations, just like is currently done with alternative nuclear power innovations.
    1