460
If AI is so good at coding … where are the open source contributions?
(pivot-to-ai.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 May 2025
460 points (100.0% liked)
TechTakes
1916 readers
78 users here now
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Well grep doesn't hallucinate things that are not actually in the logs I'm grepping so I think I'll stick to grep.
(Or ripgrep rather)
With grep it’s me who hallucinates that I can right good regex :,)
(I don't mean to take aim at you with this despite how irked it'll sound)
I really fucking hate how many computer types go "ugh I can't" at regex. the full spectrum of it, sure, gets hairy. but so many people could be well served by decently learning grouping/backrefs/greedy match/char-classes (which is a lot of what most people seem to reach for[0])
that said, pomsky is an interesting thing that might in fact help a lot of people go from "I want $x" as a human expression of intent, to "I have $y" as a regex expression
[0] - yeah okay sometimes you also actually need a parser. that's a whole other conversation. I'm talking about "quickly hacking shit up in a text editor buffer in 30s" type cases here
Hey. I can do regex. It's specifically grep I have beef with. I never know off the top of my head how to invoke it. Is it
-e?-r?-i?man grep? More like,man, get grep the hell outta here!now listen, you might think gnu tools are offensively inconsistent, and to that I can only say
find(1)find(1)? You betterfind(1)some other place to be, buster. In this house, we use the file explorer search barcurl cht.sh/grepIf I start using this and add grep functionality to my day-to-day life, I can’t complain about not knowing how to invoke grep in good conscience, dawg. I can’t hold my shitposting back like that, dawg!
jk that looks useful. Thanks!
The cheatsheet and tealdeer projects are awesome. It's one of my (many) favorite things about the user experience honestly. Really grateful for those projects
The funny thing is, I’m just going with the joke, I’m actually pretty good with regex lol
woo! but still also check out pomsky, it's legit handy!
(also I did my disclaimer at the start there, so, y'know (but also igwym))
Hallucinations become almost a non issue when working with newer models, custom inference, multishot prompting and RAG
But the models themselves fundamentally can't write good, new code, even if they're perfectly factual
If LLM hallucinations ever become a non-issue I doubt I'll be needing to read a deeply nested buzzword laden lemmy post to first hear about it.
The promptfarmers can push the hallucination rates incrementally lower by spending 10x compute on training (and training on 10x the data and spending 10x on runtime cost) but they're already consuming a plurality of all VC funding so they can't 10x many more times without going bust entirely. And they aren't going to get them down to 0%, hallucinations are intrinsic to how LLMs operate, no patch with run-time inference or multiple tries or RAG will eliminate that.
And as for newer models... o3 actually had a higher hallucination rate because trying to squeeze rational logic out of the models with fine-tuning just breaks them in a different direction.
I will acknowledge in domains with analytically verifiable answers you can check the LLMs that way, but in that case, its no longer primarily an LLM, you've got an entire expert system or proof assistant or whatever that can operate independently of the LLM and the LLM is just providing creative input.
We should maximise hallucinations, actually. That is, we should hack the environmental controls of the data centers to be conducive for fungi growth, and flood them with magic mushrooms spores. We can probably get the rats on board by selling it as a different version of nuking the data centers.
What if [tokes joint] hallucinations are actually, like, proof the models are almost at human level man!
stopping this bit here because I don't want to continue writing a JRE episode
@swlabr @scruiser Java Runtime Environment?
no the worse one
Doesn't really narrow it down, sorry
(jk I don't have beef with the JavaRE)
Joe Rogan Experience!
...side note my most prominent irl conversation about Joe Rogan was with a relative who was trying to convince me it was a good thing that Joe Rogan platformed a celebrity who was saying 1x1=2 (Terrence Howard). Literally beyond parody.
Ok, we are already very far off topic. I actually have heard an interesting take about Terrence Howard and his “New Math”.
(NB: I have an undergrad major in mathematics)
So, one of my favourite comedy podcasts is “My Momma Told Me,” a podcast that talks about black conspiracy theories. In each episode, the topic is framed as “my momma told me <insert conspiracy theory here”. Terrence Howard comes up as a sort of mythological icon on the pod, it’s very funny. On a recent episode they actually get to facetime him, it rules.
Anyway, the take comes from the host Langston Kerman (who does not have a major in mathematics, nor any background in science). It’s a very charitable interpretation that the whole 1x1=2 stuff isn’t so much about creating a new math with different rules, it’s more an expression of the frustration towards the algorithms and calculations that are part of the power structures in society that disadvantage and disenfranchise minority populations. Because this is all being thought of and formulated by people outside of the discipline, anything appearing arithmetic is “math,” so a “new math” is needed.
Basically: it’s kafkaesque. But yeah more likely than not Terrence Howard has gone off the deep end.
I hadn’t encountered either the Howard person nor heard of this podcast, but imma find that episode and listen because it sounds like quite an experience!
Sadly I have seen people make that exact point
@vivendi @V0ldek * hallucinations are a fundamental trait of LLM tech, they're not going anywhere
God, this cannot be overstated. An LLM’s sole function is to hallucinate. Anything stated beyond that is overselling.