What prompt did you use to make this đ¤¨đ¤
The irony. I bet the guy who prompted that calls himself an artist.
Was going to comment about how there is a stock photo for everything. Fingers seem too good for AI?
Nevermind, that kids right hand... đ
Also: the middle fingers are far too long
Now look at his eyelids...
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/family-laughing-at-crying-child-opening-christmas-present
That includes some history, but not the prompt itself.
That's why I'm proud to be also programming in HTML
it's only real programming if you also use CSS
It's only real gatekeeping if you have a physical gate
"prompt engineering"
Sounds made up af
The US add engineer to everything to sound most prestigious than they are. If you sell your service as a AI prompt writer, you get paid peanuts. If you sell the same service as AI prompt engineer, the C-Suites cream their pants.
It is, I believe the correct term is "proompt"
"Engineering"
Amateurs, I'm an AI artistĂŠ and demand big bucks for "my" art pieces. Also fuck everybody who made all the stuff that the AI stole from.
They're not engineers and they're too chicken shit to act like engineers.
âprompt engineeringâ in itself is such an embarrassing term for the act of saying âcomputer uhhh show me epic boobies!!â
like that joke about calling dishwashing âsubmerged porcelain technicianâ but unironically
It's not engineering either. Or art. It's only barely writing, in an overly literal sense.
mm yes ai
People in glass houses...
Software engineering isn't engineering.
Yes, it is. Mostly because "real engineering" isn't the high bar it's made out to be. From that blog:
Nobody I read in these arguments, not one single person, ever worked as a ârealâ engineer. At best they had some classical training in the classroom, but we all know that looks nothing like reality. Nobody in this debate had anything more than stereotypes to work with. The difference between the engineering in our heads and in reality has been noticed by others before, most visibly by Glenn Vanderburg. He read books on engineering to figure out the difference. But I wanted to go further.
Software has developed in an area where the cost of failure is relatively low. We might make million dollar mistakes, but it's not likely anybody dies from it. In areas where somebody could die from bad software, techniques like formal verification come into play. Those tend to make everything take 10 times longer, and there's no compelling reason for the industry at large to do that.
If anything, we should lean into this as an advantage. How fast can we make the cycle of change to deployment?
I help make Healthcare software. Mistakes can easily lead to death. Not most, but it's something we always have to worry about.
We might make million dollar mistakes, but itâs not likely anybody dies from it.
I had a coworker who got a gig writing PDA software for a remote-controlled baseball machine. He was to this day the most incompetent programmer I've ever met personally; his biggest mistake on this project was firing a 120 mph knuckleball (a pitch with no spin so its flight path is incredibly erratic) a foot over a 12-year-old kid's head. This was the only time in my 25-year career that I had to physically restrain someone (the client, in this case) to prevent a fist fight. I replaced my coworker on the project after this and you can bet I took testing a little bit more seriously than he did.
It gives Kerbal Space Program energy.
In many cases this is accurate. Programming alone doesn't amount to engineering. Lotta low quality lines of code being churned out these days because standards have dropped.
By how some teams operate, and some developers think, there is certainly cases where the "engineering" aspect is hard to find.
But is "prompt hacking" considered actual "hacking?"
Bro if you could get there just by prompting, it would be.
There are no models good enough to just ask for something to be done and it gets done.
There will be someday though.
Build an entire ecosystem, with multiple frontends, apps, databases, admin portals. It needs to work with my industry. Make it run cheap on the cloud. Also make sure it's pretty.
The prompts are getting so large we may need to make some sort of... Structured language to pipe into.. a device that would.. compile it all...
There are no models good enough to just ask for something to be done and it gets done.
We call those "compilers". There are many of them.
I only program with LBP2 microchips.
BUT I TOOK ALL THESE COURSES!
I also can make up words.
hĂśrgenmal
Looks like every Christmas I've ever had...
j/k, or am I?
No I am... but am I really? :-P
Sounds like someone's worried about how easily replaced they'll be in the future...
Sounds like science fiction. No proof that itâs useful right now except copy pasta from StackOverflow.
Made by someone who doesn't utilize LLMs effectively
Using an IDE isn't programming either
But I'll definitely prefer hiring someone who does. Sure, you can code in Vi without plugins, but why? Leave your elitism at home. We have deadlines and money to make.
Edit: The discussions I've had about AI here on Lemmy and Hackernews have seriously made me consider asking whether or not the candidate uses AI tools as an interview question, with the only correct answer a variation of "Yes I do".
Boomer seniors scared of new tools is why Oracle is still around. I don't want any of those on my team.
AIâs not bad, it just doesnât save me time. For quick, simple things, I can do it myself faster than the AI. For more big, complex tasks, I find myself rigorously checking the AIâs code to make sure no new bugs or vulnerabilities are introduced. Instead of reviewing that code, Iâd rather just write it myself and have the confidence that there are no glaring issues. Beyond more intelligent autocomplete, I donât really have much of a need for AI when I program.
This is how I use it, and it's a great way for me to speed up. It's a rubber duck for me. I have a fake conversation, it gives me different ideas or approaches to solve a problem. It does amazing with that
The code it spits out is something else though. The code it's trained on in GitHub means it could be based on someone with 2 months experience writing their CS201 program, or a seasoned experienced engineer. I've found it faster to get the gist of what it's saying, then rewrite it to fit my application.
Not even mentioning the about 50% chance response of "hey why don't you use this miracle function that does exactly what you need" and then you realize that the miracle function doesn't exist, and it just made it up.
I use it a lot for writing documentation comments (my company's style guide requires them), and for small sections at a time. Never a full solution.
Using an IDE definety IS programming.
Sure, you can code in Vi without plugins, but why? Leave your elitism at home. We have deadlines and money to make.
Nothing elitist about it. Vim is not a modular tool that I can swap out of my mental model. Before someone says it, I've tried VS Code's vim plugin, and it sucks ass.
