▲ 505 ▼ 2027 RAM Capacity Has Reportedly Been Sold out (www.ign.com) submitted 1 month ago by cantankerous_cashew@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world 173 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 month ago (4 children) Huh? C compiles to machine code. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] enumerator4829@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 month ago (3 children) Yes, but why write C when we can let the LLM write assembly directly? Compilers are unnecessary bloat we don’t have a need for with modern technology. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] foenkyfjutschah@programming.dev 1 point 1 month ago yeah kid replace your systems with LLM written opcode streams completely all you want. regarding the question: for maintain- and portability. permalink fedilink source parent [–] zbyte64@awful.systems 0 points 1 month ago (1 child) Putting aside assembly code gets compiled as well, the bottle neck is always validation of these systems. Making the systems more opaque makes the already difficult task of ensuring it works even harder. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] enumerator4829@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 month ago* Assembly code isn’t ”compiled”. To quote wikipedia: Assembly code is converted into executable machine code by a utility program referred to as an assembler. […] The conversion process is referred to as assembly, as in assembling the source code. The computational step when an assembler is processing a program is called assembly time. My point is that people are already trying to replace compilers with LLMs, and yes, it is stupid as shit, but still real. Also, maybe see if an LLM can help you detect sarcasm without explicit content tagging. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] enumerator4829@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 month ago (3 children) Yes, but why write C when we can let the LLM write assembly directly? Compilers are unnecessary bloat we don’t have a need for with modern technology. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] foenkyfjutschah@programming.dev 1 point 1 month ago yeah kid replace your systems with LLM written opcode streams completely all you want. regarding the question: for maintain- and portability. permalink fedilink source parent [–] zbyte64@awful.systems 0 points 1 month ago (1 child) Putting aside assembly code gets compiled as well, the bottle neck is always validation of these systems. Making the systems more opaque makes the already difficult task of ensuring it works even harder. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] enumerator4829@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 month ago* Assembly code isn’t ”compiled”. To quote wikipedia: Assembly code is converted into executable machine code by a utility program referred to as an assembler. […] The conversion process is referred to as assembly, as in assembling the source code. The computational step when an assembler is processing a program is called assembly time. My point is that people are already trying to replace compilers with LLMs, and yes, it is stupid as shit, but still real. Also, maybe see if an LLM can help you detect sarcasm without explicit content tagging. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] foenkyfjutschah@programming.dev 1 point 1 month ago yeah kid replace your systems with LLM written opcode streams completely all you want. regarding the question: for maintain- and portability. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 0 points 1 month ago (1 child) Putting aside assembly code gets compiled as well, the bottle neck is always validation of these systems. Making the systems more opaque makes the already difficult task of ensuring it works even harder. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] enumerator4829@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 month ago* Assembly code isn’t ”compiled”. To quote wikipedia: Assembly code is converted into executable machine code by a utility program referred to as an assembler. […] The conversion process is referred to as assembly, as in assembling the source code. The computational step when an assembler is processing a program is called assembly time. My point is that people are already trying to replace compilers with LLMs, and yes, it is stupid as shit, but still real. Also, maybe see if an LLM can help you detect sarcasm without explicit content tagging. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] enumerator4829@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 month ago* Assembly code isn’t ”compiled”. To quote wikipedia: Assembly code is converted into executable machine code by a utility program referred to as an assembler. […] The conversion process is referred to as assembly, as in assembling the source code. The computational step when an assembler is processing a program is called assembly time. My point is that people are already trying to replace compilers with LLMs, and yes, it is stupid as shit, but still real. Also, maybe see if an LLM can help you detect sarcasm without explicit content tagging. permalink fedilink source parent