Group Actions
Engagement
  • Author Author: Catwell
  • Date Created: Date Created
  • Views 5142 views
  • Likes 4 likes
  • Comments 9 comments
Related
Recommended

Jensen Huang Believes AI Can Program and Kids Shouldn't Learn It

Catwell

image

Jensen Huang says that AI will eventually take over coding tasks. (Image Credit: NVIDIA)

What do you all think of this?

During the World Governments Summit in Dubai, NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang talked about AI's involvement in the coding world --- suggesting that it may end programming careers. He also stated that coding languages could eventually be replaced by human language prompts, and kids who want to study tech won't need to learn programming.  The NVIDIA CEO believes that AI advancements and adoption support this statement.

And he might be right. For example, people have used AI tools like ChatGPT and Microsoft Copilot, prompting them to generate Windows keys and develop software. More noteworthy, chatbots' natural processing language capabilities have improved, indicating that we could use these tools to produce perfect code. 

"Over the last 10-15 years, almost everybody who sits on a stage like this would tell you that it is vital that your children learn computer science. Everybody should learn how to program. In fact, it is almost exactly the opposite. It is our job to create computing technology such that nobody has to program and that the programming language is human. Everybody in the world is now a programmer. This is the miracle of AI," Huang said.

According to NVIDIA, those interested in coding might want to focus more on other industries like education, manufacturing, farming, and biology instead. This doesn't mean human programming should come to a complete halt since we'll need to figure out where it's appropriate to deploy AI coding. According to Huang, the best workaround for this change would be to upskill. This allows future programmers to understand AI programming and how to use it. 

"It is our job to create computing technology such that nobody has to program. And that the programming language is human; everybody in the world is now a programmer. This is the miracle of artificial intelligence," Huang said.

I'm on the fence. I doubt it'll accidentally discover something original. 

Have a story tip? Message me at: http://twitter.com/Cabe_Atwell

  • I take all this with a grain of salt.  "MODBUS is dead."  "Desktop PC's are dead."  When I got into Amateur Radio a few years ago, the thing I was interested in - email over radio - "was dead".

    What I've seen is that NONE of these is dead.  The folks promoting their technology want you to believe that it is the only choice, but the reality is that it doesn't deliver what you hope it will - not yet.  Sometimes, not ever.  And the old stuff... still serves the purpose that it did in the past.

    AI is a paving block on the path.  It is not the destination.

  • If such a thing comes to pass, I see nothing good coming from it.

  • I guess you could flip the problem on its head. If you take the 'Library of Babel' approach, then every program that has ever been written, or that is yet to be written effectively already exists in the 'library'. You just have to find the right 'page, chapter, shelf, bookcase, room' where the correct permutation of sequence of bytes is for the user requirement. As AI is pretty good at the brute force statistical approach, then its just a matter of time for it to match the required sequence of bytes with the user's specification.

  • in reply to Catwell

    "...I wanted an Arduino mega to control a dozen or so solenoids..."

    When it comes to physical computing applications how does the 'AI programmer' know about physical device parameters here ? Does it stop and prompt for that information, does it look it up on the web, or does the user have to remember to provide all that upfront ? Or does it just assume that the slow solenoid can keep up with the speed of its execution ?

    "...and it just wouldn't compile and work..."

    So the 'AI programmer' feels that it doesn't need to test that its output compiles without error or verify it even vaguely works as specified ?  

    Might be interesting to get it to program a Therac-25 style machine and see if it does any better than the humans. Although as it will never be a potential subject of its own design then that may raise an eyebrow over safety issues. How do test pilots feel about strapping in an AI programmer on the first test flight as opposed to a human programmer I wonder ?

  • I've seen AI step in and crush so many jobs already. So, it's disruptive for sure.

    I tried using AI to generate some code for an arduino. It didn't work for me.

    I wanted an Arduino mega to control a dozen or so solenoids. Cascading them, random actuation, etc - and it just wouldn't compile and work. 

    So, until something simple like that is addressed, IDK if Jensen Huang is right here. It's one thing to have AI write a subpar story, paper or draw some pictures, but controlling a whole system like an arduino with common spoken language might be some time yet.