This sort of thing worked in the '90s. Many of the security restrictions in browsers these days means it doesn’t consider the local file to be actually local, and you have to host from some kind of server. There are mini servers that are trivial to spin up, like SimpleHTTPServer on Python.
User claims to have made a website using chatgpt, putting programmers out of their jobs. However, it’s revealed user knows next to nothing about making that website accessible for others, as revealed from the last line. User sent a local link (that works for their own computer only) to their friend (which naturally shouldn’t work).
The joke is it’s an iMessage chat and they are sending a Windows path which doesn’t make sense for iOS or Mac, the only two operating systems that support iMessage.
On a more serious note, ChatGPT, ironically, does suck at webdev frontend. The one task that pretty much everyone agrees could be done by a monkey (given enough time) is the one it doesn’t understand at all.
A good chunk of that has to do with trackers and ads. Things forced on webdevs by management.
Not that webdevs couldn’t improve anything otherwise; there are certainly optimizations to be had. But pop open the dev network panel on your browser, clear cache, and refresh the page. A lot of the holdup and dancing elements you’ll see are from third party trackers and ads.
I agree, and in addition to way too many trackers and advertisements clogging up the page, this is also due to the time, effort, and knowledge not being provided to write performant and compliant code, which should be important given the infinite possibilities of client machines. This can be worsened by only having full stack developers who aren’t knowledgeable in web dev (especially CSS) or by sacrificing performance for trendy javascript-bloated design features
You do of course realize that you just said that the problem with the modern web is that webdev can be and far too often is done by monkeys?
I agree that there is a vast difference, even from an end user’s perspective, between a good web developer and a bad one, but the fact remains that the bar for calling oneself a web dev is appallingly low and ChatGPT nevertheless fails to clear it
I suppose you could see it like that, but I’m saying it can’t be done by “monkeys”, and the pervasive notion that it can has led to broken websites across the Internet
I think I see what you mean. Many a very competent backend dev (and many more a kid in their bedroom with zero programming experience) has thought to themselves “how hard can webdev possibly be?” and blindly stumbled through making a website that looks fine on their machine without bothering to understand what the various CSS units do and turning it into an utter monstrosity if you even slightly change the size of the browser window, and the web suffers for it.
As a primarily backend dev myself who’s tried my hand at web once or twice, I still think that web developers are by far the most pampered in the industry when it comes to development tools (I can change CSS parameters with sliders right in my browser, see the page update in real time, and when I’m done I can just export the modified .css file to disk and upload it directly to my server with zero touchup to make my changes live? Are you KIDDING ME?) but I also think it’s important to treat the practice with the respect it deserves. By that I mean taking the time to learn the languages, read through MDN’s excellent documentation, and take the time to fully understand what each CSS parameter actually does instead of trial-and-erroring your way into something that only works for you. The same thing you’d do if you were learning any new programming language. Once you do that, apart from a few hiccups due to browser inconsistencies (any time Safari would like to stop eating glue I’d appreciate it) and having to come up with something that looks good in portrait, and get past a metric f**k ton of googling and memorizing the minute differences between dozens of very similar parameters, it’s some of the most fun I’ve had as a programmer. I love being able to just go “I want a bunch of circles at the top of my page that bounce up and down in sequence.” “Sure, give me two minutes.” I’d stress about that for days in any other environment. Why didn’t anyone tell me it could BE like this?
I don’t think it’s very useful at generating good code or answering anything about most libraries, but I’ve found it to be helpful answering specific JS/TS questions.
The MDN version is also pretty great too. I’ve never done a Firefox extension before and MDN Plus was surprisingly helpful at explaining the limitations on mobile. Only downside is it’s limited to 5 free prompts/day.
Engineering is about trust. In all other and generally more formalized engineering disciplines, the actual job of an engineer is to provide confidence that something works. Software engineering may employ fewer people because the tools are better and make people much more productive, but until everyone else trusts the computer more, the job will exist.
If the world trusts AI over engineers then the fact that you don’t have a job will be moot.
Very interesting point. Probably the most pressing problem then is to find a way for the black box to be formally verified and the role of AI engineers shifts to keeping the CI\CD green.
People don’t have anywhere near enough knowledge of how things work to make their choices based on trust. People aren’t getting on the subway because they trust the engineers did a good job; they’re doing it because it’s what they can afford and they need to get to work.
Similarly, people aren’t using Reddit or Adobe or choosing their cars firmware based on trust. People choose what is affordable and convenient.
What’s being discussed here is the hiring of engineers rather than consumer choices. Hiring an engineer is absolutely an expression of trust. The business trusts that the engineer will be able to concretely realize abstract business goals, and that they will be able to troubleshoot any deviations.
AI writing code is one thing, but intuitively trusting that an AI will figure out what you want for you and keep things running is a long way off.
In civil engineering public works are certified by an engineer; its literally them saying if this fails i am at fault. The public is trusting the engineer to say its safe.
Yeah, people may not know that the subway is safe because of engineering practices, but if there was a major malfunction, potentially involving injuries or loss of life, every other day, they would know, and I’m sure they would think twice about using it.
In my hometown there’s two types of public transit: municipal and commercial. I was surprised to learn that a lot of folk, even the younger ones, only travel by former, even though the commercials are a lot faster, frequent and more comfortable. When asked why, the answer is the same: If anything happens on municipal transport - you can sue the transport company and even the city itself. If anything happens on a commercial line - there’s only a migrant driver and “Individual Enterpreneur John Doe” with a few leased buses to his name. Trust definitely plays a factor here, but you’re right that it’s definitely not based on technical knowledge.
Hmm. I’ve never thought about it that way. It took a long time for engineering to become that way IIRC - in the past anybody could build a bridge. The main obstacle to this, then, is that people might be a bit too risk-tolerant around AI at first. Hopefully this is where it ends up going, though.
I predict that, within the year, AI will be doing 100% of the development work that isn’t total and utter bullshit pain-in-the-ass complexity, layered on obfuscations, composed of needlessly complex bullshit.
That’s right, within a year, AI will be doing .001% of programming tasks.
“Attend this meeting for me. If anyone asks, claim that your camera and microphone aren’t working. After the meeting, condense the important information into one paragraph and email it to me.”
I’m an elite FBI KGB K-unit traffic guard. You dun goofed with your silly hacking attempts as I’ve traced your IP back to ::1. Prepare to get your ass counter-hacked
If it’s on the same device, it would open a page showing her what is in the downloads folder of his user. I think the joke is he might have something embarrassing there, but I wouldn’t know since I only have things there when I’m downloading them and then immediately file them away to some actual hyperspecific folder
why would they be on the same device? how can they be on the same device at the same time? also if she gets the full link it would only show her the html page, not the rest of the folder
Yeah, it’s amazing at showing you the idiomatic way to do really specific, narrow-scoped things in a language you’re not familiar with… except for when it’s wrong.
It’s good at refactoring smaller bits of code. The longer the input, the more likely it is to make errors (and you should prefer to start a new chat than continue a long chat for the same reason). It’s also pretty good at translating code to other languages (e.g. MySQL->PG, Python->C#), reading OpenAPI json definitions and creating model classes to match, and stuff like that.
Basically, it’s pretty good when it doesn’t have to generate stuff that requires creating complex logic. If you ask it about tasks, languages, and libraries that it has likely trained a lot on (i.e. the most popular stuff in FOSS software and example repos), it doesn’t hallucinate libraries too much. And, GPT4 is a lot better than GPT3.5 at coding tasks. GPT3.5 is pretty bad. GPT4 is a bit better to Copilot as well.
I’ve found it great for tracking down specific things in libraries and databases I’m not terribly familiar with when I don’t know the exact term for them
Add comment