This sounds just like the idea that quantum computing will solve a lot of computational issues, which we know isn’t true. Why would AGI be any different?
Accuracy/faithfulness to the code as written isn't necessarily what you care about though, it's an understanding of the underlying problem. Just translating code doesn't actually help you do that.
You’re shifting the goalposts. The initial point was that the Rust regeneration of SQLite was wasted money, because it’s unviable due to its slow speed. You’re trying to shift it to be about how it may get better over time. Do you have something that is more specifically refuting the initial quote that doesn’t involve anything about potential improvement?
The point wasn’t to make better SQLite, it was to make a functioning rust SQLite. Which it did. Badly but you don’t start at race cars. No one was assuming production SQLite.
The point is that artisanal code is to a first approximation a thing of the past. Most engineers will not have a job writing code in these niches that survive, and thus coding as a career is effectively dead.
If you do a lot of small commits, it's entirely reasonable to make 50 commits in 24 hours. Looking at a few random commits they seem human generated (with potentially some copied CSS).
Maybe, before making an accusation that it is AI generated you should have some proof. Do you have any?
I am strongly opposed to anthropomorphising autocomplete (phrases like "I asked <my favorite LLM>", "<my LLM> suggested", ...) or even referring to autocomplete+tooling as "AI" because it devalues actual human intelligence. But I've seen the opposite recently - devaluing human work by using language normally used for machines.
Maybe you didn't mean anything by it but how people talk about things shapes how they think about it (which arguably is one area where humans and LLMs are similar).
In general, any government already has your information, and it's naive to think that they don't; if you pay taxes, have ever had a passport, etc. they already have all identifying information that they could need. For services, or for the government knowing what you do (which services you visit), then a zero-knowledge proof would work in this case.
reply