The New York Times’s subhead: “We’re entering a new renaissance of software development. We should all be excited, despite the uncertainties that lie ahead.” It took a century starting back in 1875...
Paul Ford: “The bot can run for a full hour and make whole, designed websites and apps that may be flawed, but credible….”
When is a thing done badly considered a thing done at all? What does it mean for something to be flawed but credible? Who is responsible for recognizing the flaw and correcting it?
And if you put in the correct evaluations for the system, you then set the machine on loop and get it to fix the code itself until it is done exactly as you want it…
Paul Ford: “The bot can run for a full hour and make whole, designed websites and apps that may be flawed, but credible….”
When is a thing done badly considered a thing done at all? What does it mean for something to be flawed but credible? Who is responsible for recognizing the flaw and correcting it?
Well obviously, a human has to fix the flaws. But fixing flaws is a lot easier, and takes less time, than coding from scratch.
And if you put in the correct evaluations for the system, you then set the machine on loop and get it to fix the code itself until it is done exactly as you want it…