So i was talking to my uncle last night who is a retired CTO and said Microsoft created an AI test harness that will take code (AI generated or not), search for vulnerabilities, fix them and then provide an overview of all the changes. I thought sounds great on paper, but we still need validation that it did the job right. He then looked at me and said “why would we need to validate if in the future models are getting better. Im just not sure where devs will fit in the world anymore.” But I thought going back to the original test harness, the AI checking for vulnerabilities still needs code, so if its generate by AI is it not almost like checking its own homework, right? Then were not considering cost of resources, which granted will get better over the next few decades (we hope) to house better models but will it truly have human level reasoning? It doesnt gel with me that the entire process of product creation, testing and validation is all done via LLMs and then straight to production (cause AI can now build IAC now eliminating the need for cloud engineers aswell according to him). This entire take sounds ok on paper for anyone with a tech business or a few million to invest but when you actually use a little bit of non-AI influenced brain power i can think of so many things going wrong. Token cost running a business tech/IT budget to zero, production destroying bugs and then the non-existing devs having no idea what the code does, then IAC being incorrect could absolutely destroy the auto-scaling and slowly ramp up the cost without that level of validation and fine-tuning. Why does this community think? Personally … I think my uncle is on the AI overhyped train. submitted by /u/paddockson
Originally posted by u/paddockson on r/ArtificialInteligence
You must log in or # to comment.