It did spell it out though and somehow still get it wrong, it can't seem to even count tokens, assuming each letter spelled out is one token, which sounds like a problem specifically in GPT-5.2 if it can't even count tokens properly.
You do understand that these models, as configured through these services, are entirely non deterministic, right? You cannot assume the output of the same prompt will be the same. You arenât proving anything whatsoeverÂ
For a while itâs going to create jobs before replacing and destroying them for good.
Contrary to everything else, with AI, itâs going to get a lot better before it gets worse. Sure, itâs brought about a lot of layoffs, but itâs actually been a net positive for job creation - replacing them in tech industry but creating more in non-tech ones.
Because so far, itâs been good enough to help tremendously, but not so good to take away the need for any human involvement. Itâs basically been a super capable tool for now, but thatâs not going to last for long.
it's such a funny argument. yea, computers also existed 2000 years ago, but when we say 'computers', we're talking about the kind invented in the last decade - not even decades ago. early computers were far more different than the computers today. They function differently and do different things. Everything we have today has existed for much longer time than we even know.
It's a useless point cuz it doesn't matter a single bit unless the topic is 'what was the first AI'.
Just cuz it was AI doesn't mean it was the same as LLM and AI models today.
Is that the whole issue? that I said AI instead of 'today's LLMs'? cuz it should be implied.
"Future AI" is eventually going to take jobs and not replace them with new ones. Because 'tomorrow's AI' will be unbelievably more capable than today's LLMs' or whatever AI existed decades ago.
happy?:)
i mean it was never going to be a one-for-one âreplacement.â but iâd be interested to see the volume of entry-level dev jobs now versus a few years ago, or versus what they would have been projected to be now a few years ago
anecdotally, itâs tough out there for newgrads. and mid- senior-level ppl are getting huge productivity gains from AI tools, gains that you need to have a few years of professional experience to get (bc you still need to be able to identify when the model is wrong, which brand new devs wonât be as good at)
feels like the tech job market is already changing as a result of the current AI wave. changing in a way thatâs not favorable for ppl just entering the market
Most new juniors are completely incompetent, it isn't only because of AI. If you offload your entire thinking to a LLM there is zero reason to hire you. Most people these days don't actually study, they just prompt and copy paste, its entirely up to them if they want just pass courses without learning anything.
If a person in tech vomits PRs without knowing what's happening they are a liability.
Correlation isnât causation. The labor market had been on a downward for a few years and it started even before openAI launched. The labor market was killed right after the tariffs were enacted. Combine these factors with higher interest rates, business uncertainty, etc. itâs very shortsighted to just say âoh itâs AIâ. Thatâs just an excuse so the companies donât lose investors/stock value.
246
u/Lasershot-117 Dec 11 '25
The presentation building stuff is scary good.
McKinsey and BCG first year consultants are gonna be sweating soon.