top | item 43987474

(no title)

prvc | 9 months ago

Merely from your telling, it seems it is no longer "not worth the effort", as "the effort" has been reduced drastically. This is itself significant.

discuss

order

AndrewKemendo|9 months ago

That right and In fact it’s the core purpose of the tool.

This is complex automation which by definition compresses the solution into a computable process that works more efficiently than the non-automated process

That, in fact, is the revolutionary part - you’re changing how energy is used to solve the problem.

codr7|9 months ago

Faster, yes; more efficiently...I guess that's why they're funding nuclear plants then?

SideQuark|9 months ago

This advance likely uses more compute than the authors in 2009 could have imagined. It most certainly is not drastically reduced effort.

cman1444|9 months ago

That assumes that compute = effort, which is not how most people would interpret it I think.

empath75|9 months ago

This is exactly why I think the concerns about AI taking people's jobs are overblown. There is not a limited amount of knowledge work to do or things that can be invented or discovered. There's just work that isn't worth the effort, time or money to do right now, it doesn't mean it's not valuable, it's just not cost effective. If you reduce effort, time and money, then suddenly you can do it.

Like even just for programming. I just had an AI instrument my app for tracing, something I wanted to do for a while, but I didn't know how to do and didn't feel like figuring out how to do it. That's not work we were likely to hire someone to do or that would ever get done if the AI wasn't there. It's a small thing, but small things add up.

geodel|9 months ago

It is not some very explicit threshold beyond which AI will take job but before it won't. What's already happening is long drawn attrition where tools at different level of code, low code , no code will keep creeping up. And it will start with people are not respected or valued for their work, so they can leave, once left, they will not be replaced or replaced lower skilled folks and at some point that position stop existing altogether.

In a way it is nothing new but natural progression of technology. It is increasing pace of change that is different. Can a person learn some skills by their 20s and apply productively throughout their lifetime? Now at this point it is so thoroughly untrue that I'd be laughed out if I asked for such thing. We are told to up skill few times in career to up-skilling continuously.

As changes are getting faster and faster more people are gonna fall wayside and of course they can blame themselves for their predicament.