Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I have a vague memory that Bitcoin used to be instant in the first versions - or at least with near certainty that the advertised transaction was real, but that the protocol was later modified in such a way that this mechanism was no longer reliable. It might have been enshittified.
AI is still largely affected by garbage in garbage out.
Exactly. When it comes to code, for instance, what percentage of the training data is Knuth, Carmack, and similarly skilled programmers, and what percentage is spaghetti code perpetrated by underpaid and uninterested interns?
Shitty code in the wild massively outweighs properly written code, so by definition an LLM autocomplete engine, which at best can only produce an average of its training model, will only produce shitty code. (Of course, though, average or below average programmers won't be able — or willing — to recognise it as shitty code, so they'll feel like it's saving them time. And above average programmers won't have a job anymore, so they won't be able to do anything about it.)
And as more and more code is produced by LLMs the percentage of shitty code in the training data will only get higher, and the shittiness will only get higher, until newly trained LLMs can only produce code too shitty to even compile, and there will be no programmers left to fix it, and civilisation will collapse.
But, hey, at least the line went up for a while and Altman and Huang and their ilk will have made obscene amounts of money they didn't need, so it'll have been worth it, I suppose.