I watched this panel last night and thought it was refreshingly well done.
Perhaps I’m biased and unbalanced, but it also gives me the impression that there’s a certain imbalance in the level of knowledge of the “AS-IS” and what can be accomplished today.
In any case, I tend to agree more with the users’ assessments and see this as a central issue. If you don’t fully understand the market and believe that your opinion is the only correct one, then the future may slip away from you faster and faster. In the end, a bold general statement that there’s no way around AI doesn’t help much, in my humble opinion, if what was said earlier seems to contradict this.
For those who watched the entire video and not just the title, what are your impressions?
Thank you very much! Pretty much corresponds to my perception. “The supposed genius is out of the bottle and is sitting on the panel” could be an accurate summary IMHO. Pun intended.
Well, if I’m not mistaken, the requirement is that if the end-users don’t want absolute bug-freeness, then they might implement AI features. But if that’s what the users want, they won’t.
I found that refreshingly honest and the topic should have died with it.
I liked the face of one panelist, when the other predicted that graphical UIs will have less importance in the near future …
I had a hunch who this would be but … its meant to be a joke, a bad joke, but still just a jest
it has NOTHING to do with giving the RIGHT answer
It has everything to do with giving AN answer that you cant tell is from a computer
You can distinguish
And once I started to watch I figured out who most of those comments related to
EDIT : Yousaf saying AI is better than humans writing documentation and Geoff objecting, is humorous ESP given the current documentation.
I definitely turned into a bad joke, I’m not convinced it was originally meant to be a joke. It definitely was an “ice breaker”
Very, very true and funny. I thought the whole time: if I would replace AI by documentation, Android, API2, web 2 it will even get funnier - Yousaf and Bob had very fair points, but my perception was "okay, once again we are back to the “yes, but we and I know best”.
I contacted and got as answer that I was violating the community rules while ranting and telling net truths. That is not true but okay: I could not do anything against.
With Web 2.0 they crashed a big project completely and I had to rewrite in a language which was not deprecated. Web 2 had not even the functionality to rewrite in that time while not ready.
So I got banned speaking truths that it was costing me a one year income of a good situated dentist.
Therefore I can understand that I ranted while I wanted to rescue the project. But the deprecation was their last word.
Most people assume ChatGPT “knows” what it’s talking about. It doesn’t. It just looks up the most likely words to follow any query. So, it makes sense that everyone’s favorite Wookie would get mentioned in a Star Wars story. But, when you’re dealing with facts, it’s another matter. They only “know” what’s in their LLMs.
And even then, it makes something up that sounds believable. In Belgium we did a test with a question about our King Boudewijn and although it was right about him being dead, it made up a whole story about he died in a plane crash, which he didn’t. A.I. for the moment is just a huge statistical number cruncher.
- Yousaf and Bob had very fair points, but my perception was "okay, once again we are back to the “yes, but we and I know best”.
