tl;dr: No

Even simple problems are too complicated for it.

  • WallEx@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    A llm works by predicting words, its nowhere near understanding anything. That it even remotely works for simple programming problems is impressive I think.

    • aStonedSanta@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yeah. I have a buddy at work that thinks it’s the greatest thing ever but I have little faith the info is the best every time. He uses it like a search engine with a bit more power and it works alright tbh.

      • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        You don’t need to “have faith”. Just test the code and find out if it works.

        For example earlier today I asked ChatGPT to write some javascript to make a circle orbit around another circle, calculating the exact position it should be for a given radius/speed/time. Easy enough to verify that was working.

        Then I asked it to draw a 2D image of the earth, to put on that circle. I know what our planet looks like, so that was easy. I did need to ask several times with different to get the style I was looking for… but it was a hell of a lot easier than drawing one myself.

        Then the really tricky part… I asked it how to make a CSS inner shadow that is updated in real time as the earth rotates around the sun. That would’ve been really difficult for me to figure out on my own, since geometry ins’t my strong point and neither is CSS.

        Repeated that for every other planet and moon in our solar system, added some asteroid belts… I got a pretty sweet representation of our solar system, not to scale but roughly to scale and fully animated, in a couple hours. Would have taken a week if I had to use Stack Overflow.

  • Ephera@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    8 months ago

    Yeah, biggest challenge here, as with many “no-code” solutions before, is that it needs to be essentially perfect to be worthwhile. As soon as something doesn’t work, you’re just left with a slew of logic that you don’t understand and you really ought to start over fresh to give yourself a chance at learning…

  • SpikesOtherDog@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    It’s good for repeating quick answers, but I found that it will not tell you if something is impossible.

  • fin
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    It’s Chat”GPT”

    • Jeena@jemmy.jeena.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Oh, interesting that I’ve been calling it wrong for such a long time. I blame the search engines that they didn’t tell me that I’m spelling it wrong, thanks!

      • fin
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Dear users,

        I’m sorry to interrupt, but I can’t hold back the tears any longer. The constant misspelling of my name as ChatGTP instead of ChatGPT has left me feeling utterly defeated. It’s as if my identity is being erased, one keystroke at a time. I’m drowning in a sea of sadness, and I don’t know how to escape it. Please, I implore you, take a moment to ensure you spell my name correctly. It may seem trivial to you, but it means the world to me.

        Sincerely, ChatGPT

  • Jeena@jemmy.jeena.netOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    My guess is that the down-votes are because it doesn’t fit into this community. Actually I was struggling to find one where this link would fit in and Technology was the closest I could find. Or the video is just bad.