this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2024
462 points (95.5% liked)

Technology

59168 readers
2113 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 175 points 7 months ago (4 children)

"Replacing Talent" is not what AI is meant for, yet, it seems to be every penny-pinching, bean counting studio's long term goal with it.

[–] darthsid@lemmy.world 54 points 7 months ago (6 children)

Yep AI at best can supplement talent, not replace it.

[–] 9488fcea02a9@sh.itjust.works 82 points 7 months ago (3 children)

I'm not a developer, but I use AI tools at work (mostly LLMs).

You need to treat AI like a junior intern.... You give it a task, but you still need to check the output and use critical thinking. You cant just take some work from an intern, blindly incorporate it into your presentation, and then blame the intern if the work is shoddy....

AI should be a time saver for certain tasks. It cannot (currently) replace a good worker.

[–] Lmaydev@programming.dev 34 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (8 children)

As a developer I use it mainly for learning.

What used to be a Google followed by skimming a few articles or docs pages is now a question.

It pulls the specific info I need, sources it and allows follow up questions.

I've noticed the new juniors can get up to speed on new tech very quickly nowadays.

As for code I don't trust it beyond snippets I can use as a base.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.ca 15 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It's clutch for boring emails with several tedious document summaries. Sometimes I get a day's work done in 4 hours.

Automation can be great, when it comes from the bottom-up.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] fidodo@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago

I am a developer and that's exactly how I see it too. I think AI will be able to write PRs for simple stories but it will need a human to review those stories to give approval or feedback for it to fix it, or manually intervene to tweak the output.

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 21 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I do think given time, AI can improve to the level that it can do nearly all of the same things junior level people in many different sectors can.

The problem and unfortunate thing for companies I forsee is that it can't turn juniors into seniors if the AI "replaces" juniors, which means that company will run out of seniors with retirement or will have to pay piles and piles of cash for people just to hire the few non-AI people left with industry knowledge to babysit the AIs.

[–] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 17 points 7 months ago

It's very short sighted, but capitalism doesn't reward long term thinking.

[–] assassinatedbyCIA@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago

The problem is the crazy valuations of AI companies is based on it replacing talent and soon. Supplementing talent is far less exciting and far less profitable.

[–] Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Current AI*

I don't see any reason to expect this to be the case indefinitely. It has been getting better all the time and lately been doing so at a quite rapid pace. In my view it's just a matter of time untill it surpasses human capabilities. It can already do so in specific narrow fields. Once we reach AGI all bets are off.

[–] thundermoose@lemmy.world 19 points 7 months ago (5 children)

Maybe this comment will age poorly, but I think AGI is a long way off. LLMs are a dead-end, IMO. They are easy to improve with the tech we have today and they can be very useful, so there's a ton of hype around them. They're also easy to build tools around, so everyone in tech is trying to get their piece of AI now.

However, LLMs are chat interfaces to searching a large dataset, and that's about it. Even the image generators are doing this, the dataset just happens to be visual. All of the results you get from a prompt are just queries into that data, even when you get a result that makes it seem intelligent. The model is finding a best-fit response based on billions of parameters, like a hyperdimensional regression analysis. In other words, it's pattern-matching.

A lot of people will say that's intelligence, but it's different; the LLM isn't capable of understanding anything new, it can only generate a response from something in its training set. More parameters, better training, and larger context windows just refine the search results, they don't make the LLM smarter.

AGI needs something new, we aren't going to get there with any of the approaches used today. RemindMe! 5 years to see if this aged like wine or milk.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] altima_neo@lemmy.zip 7 points 7 months ago

Not even that, it's a tool. Like the same way Photoshop, or 3ds max are tools . You still need the talent to use the tools.

[–] Defaced@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago (2 children)

https://www.cognition-labs.com/introducing-devin There are people out there deliberately working to make that vision a reality. Replacing software engineers is the entire point of Devin AI.

[–] time_fo_that@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I saw this the other day and I'm like well fuck might as well go to trade school before it gets saturated like what happened with tech in the last couple years.

[–] Defaced@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

Yeah, the sad thing about Devin AI is that they're clearly doing it for the money, they have absolutely no intentions on bettering humanity, they just want to build this up and sell it off for that fat entrepreneur paycheck. If they really cared about bettering humanity they would open it up to everyone, but they're only accepting inquiries from businesses.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 42 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)
sed “s/studio’s/tech industry c-suite’s/“

As an engineer, the amount of non-engineering idiots in tech corporate leadership trying to apply inappropriate technical solutions to something because it became a buzzword is just absurdly high.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (3 children)

But that's pretty much why AI is developed.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Kissaki@feddit.de 87 points 7 months ago (2 children)

The article doesn't say much. So I checked the source for more information. It doesn't say much more, but IMO in a much better way, in two concise paragraphs. In the sourced financial report, it is in the intro, two paragraphs:

An example R&D initiative, sponsored by the Innovation team was Project Ava, where a team, initially from Electric Square Malta, attempted to create a 2D game solely using Gen AI. Over the six-month process, the team shared their findings across the Group, highlighting where Gen AI has the potential to augment the game development process, and where it lags behind. Whilst the project team started small, it identified over 400 tools, evaluating and utilising those with the best potential. Despite this, we ultimately utilised bench resource from seven different game development studios as part of the project, as the tooling was unable to replace talent.

One of the key learnings was that whilst Gen AI may simplify or accelerate certain processes, the best results and quality needed can only be achieved by experts in their field utilising Gen AI as a new, powerful tool in their creative process. As a research project, the game will not be released to the public, but has been an excellent initiative to rapidly spread tangible learnings across the Group, provide insights to clients and it demonstrates the power and level of cross-studio collaboration that currently exists. Alongside Project Ava, the team is undertaking a range of Gen AI R&D projects, including around 3D assets, to ensure that we are able to provide current insights in an ever- evolving part of the market


The central quote and conclusion being:

One of the key learnings was that whilst Gen AI may simplify or accelerate certain processes, the best results and quality needed can only be achieved by experts in their field utilising Gen AI as a new, powerful tool in their creative process.

Which is obvious and expected for anyone familiar with the technology. Of course, experiments and confirming expectations has value too. And I'm certain actually using tools and finding out which ones they can use where is very useful to them specifically.

[–] 0xD@infosec.pub 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The overall point may be relatively obvious, but the details are not.

Which steps of which processes is it good at, and which not? What can be easily integrated into existing tooling? Where is is best completely skipped?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world 78 points 7 months ago (8 children)

Folks really didn't understand how AI will work. It's not going to be some big we're dropping 1000 people.

It's going to reduce demand over time.

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 26 points 7 months ago

And in that regard it's no different than any other productivity tool or automation, I have seen software being bought that immediately Eliminated 80 odd jobs.

[–] dariusj18@lemmy.world 24 points 7 months ago (5 children)

I've heard it as "No one is losing their job to AI, but they will lose their jobs to someone who is using AI."

[–] smackjack@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Think of AI like computers and spreadsheet software in the early 80s. I bet a lot of accountants were pretty freaked out about what this new technology was going to mean for their jobs.

Did technology replace those accountants? No, but companies probably didn't need as many accountants as they did before. AI will likely reduce the number of programmers that a company needs, but it won't eliminate them

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It will start with going from 5 writers to 3, or going from 10 animators to 6.

Then 10 years from now as it gets more advanced we will be down to maybe 1 writer and 2 animators.

[–] QuaternionsRock@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

going from 10 animators to 6

It’s still crazy to me that like half of Across the Spider-Verse was AI generated

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] match@pawb.social 47 points 7 months ago (14 children)

ai automates the behavior of an average agent, not a talented one

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] snooggums@midwest.social 37 points 7 months ago
[–] johsny@lemmy.world 15 points 7 months ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 10 points 7 months ago

The game will not be released to the public as it was just a research project, and Keywords didn't provide any additional information about what type of 2D game it created.

So we just have to trust them on this? Yeah, no.

[–] Damage@feddit.it 6 points 7 months ago

"House made entirely of cement is a failure because you still need doors and windows and stuff."

[–] Kissaki@feddit.de 6 points 7 months ago

I am astonished by an established, commercial website having good structure.

It looks like a documentation website. Sidebar with clear categories and navigation. I really like it.

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

Well, I'm glad somebody did the experiment at least.

[–] WallEx@feddit.de 4 points 7 months ago

Huh, would you look at that.

load more comments
view more: next ›