"Within 5 years, there will be no human programmers," the boss of Stability AI boldly predicted, and all the bigwigs were mad: It was a big mistake, and they didn't bother to explain

Original source: Qubit

Image source: Generated by Unbounded AI‌

Stability AI CEO Emad Mostaque (Emad Mostaque) once again put himself in "the target of criticism".

The reason is that he claimed in a recent interview:

There will be no human programmers in the next five years.

And the reason: because tools like ChatGPT are already very good at writing code.

Furthermore, he stated:

By the end of 2024, ChatGPT will be directly available on every mobile phone, no internet connection required.

As soon as the news came out, the big guys couldn't sit still.

First, Grady Booch, the creator of the unified modeling language, posted three "Wrong" in a row, criticizing him for "big mistake, undoubtedly wrong".

Then Marcus immediately stood in line:

Sorry bro, I'm on Grady's side. There is absolutely no way we won't need programmers in 5 years. If you don't believe me, let's bet 50,000.

There is also big V mocking:

Isn’t this idea the same as after the assisted driving system was invented, some people thought that L5 autonomous driving could be achieved within five years...

So, what exactly is going on?

"AI replaces programmers within five years"

The initiator of this interview is Peter H. Diamandis, the founder of Singularity University in the United States. Let’s briefly go over the key points.

First, there is no doubt that the rise of generative AI has caused a lot of excitement, but also a lot of worry.

Among them is that tools like ChatGPT may completely replace some human work.

In this regard, Emad took the lead in pushing the programmer to the forefront.

When talking about the future of AI and how AI can write code, he said:

For human programmers, their future is less bright. I think this profession will disappear within five years.

For such views that will inevitably be controversial, he said ** There are data to support **:

(1) According to statistics from GitHub, 41% of all codes on the platform are currently generated by AI.

(2) Stability AI's image generator, Stable Diffusion, made it more popular on GitHub than cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum in just 3 months.

When it comes to Stability AI, he changed the topic, saying that his company has a grand goal, which is to build modules for the "social OS", so that AI can benefit everyone, and let everyone and the company have an OS that can reflect their own unique personality. artificial intelligence system.

You'll have a banker GPT, and you'll have a board GPT to replace all your crap board members*.

(At this moment, the Stability AI Board of Directors stated that it has been connoted.)

And the emphasis on everyone, he explained, is because there are many people who don't want everyone to have access to the technology.

But he firmly believes that AI cannot be controlled by any entity and must be distributed equally, as it is a fundamental right.

So how do you ensure "everyone"?

Much like the ethos of cryptocurrencies, Emad revealed that decentralization is key to their strategy.

Secondly, the host also asked whether Emad can predict what will happen in the field of AI in the next 10 years.

Regarding this question, he also stated very simply:

By the end of next year, I believe that people will not need to be online to access ChatGPT as it will be available directly on their mobile phones.

And he believes that with this AI model fully resident on the phone, our conversational interactions may undergo a fundamental transformation and create new possibilities.

In the end, although he boldly stated that programmers disappeared in five years, Emad still chose the former without hesitation when asked whether AI is a tool to enhance human potential or a threat to eliminate human potential. , on the grounds that:

People are people, and they can change the world by giving them the information that creates the most value.

“Wrong Wrong Wrong”

The content of Emad's interview was quickly made public online, and then caused no suspenseful controversy.

The point of everyone's attack is the topic of programmers disappearing in the next five years.

As mentioned at the beginning, the boss Grady Booch directly posted three "Wrong Wrong Wrong" in a row, and called his mistake "Extraordinarily, undeniably, intensely, indubitably, unquestionably wrong", that is, "very weird, Undeniable, invincible, indisputable, unquestionable" Big mistake.

His anger is evident.

As for why, Grady didn't bother to explain, just turned over old accounts:

See, Emad blocked me a long time ago because I've criticized his exaggeration before.

Marcus, who has always been talkative, immediately supported Grady. Regarding his $50,000 bet, netizens said, "I want to block too", "I'll add another 50,000 to you."

The big V@swyx with 69,000 fans couldn't help but turn on the microphone, but he was still patient:

First of all, I respect you very much, but what you said is so ridiculous. This is the same as when the assisted driving system was first invented, some people thought that L5 autonomous driving would be achieved within five years. In my opinion, AI will lower the bar but also raise the ceiling. There will be more programmers in the future, not fewer. But I do agree that the way we code is forever changed.

In fact, when it comes to programmers being replaced by AI, Nvidia Huang Renxun said in May this year that ** is not a replacement, but anyone can become an AI from today onwards.

So everyone objected to Emad's remarks almost without exception, but what's interesting is that almost no one expressed surprise.

Because, Forbes has already published a long article before, saying that although Emad is a dignified CEO, he is actually a person who likes to talk and exaggerate.

So everyone just thought he was talking nonsense.

By the way, some netizens also verified Emad's statement about GitHub. The result is that about 40% of the code is generated by AI when CoPilot is used to assist the work.

The gap between the two statements can be described as huge.

So, another "emerging" mouth-watering contestant in the technology circle, is this the only way to get a real name?

Original interview video: Reference link: [1] [2] [3]