• schmidtster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    11 months ago

    Shouldn’t there be a catch all term to explain the broader scope of the specifics?

    Science is a broad term for multiple different studies, vehicle is a broad term for cars and trucks.

        • ParetoOptimalDev@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Yesterday I prompted gpt4 to convert a power shell script to Haskell. It did it in one shot. This happens more and more frequently for me.

          I don’t want to oversell llms, but you are definitely underselling them.

        • lad@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Well, there’s an argument over not calling machine learning AI in this very thread, so… ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

          • schmidtster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            So why suggest it for the catch all term for AI when it’s only one portion of the argument itself? Such a strange suggestion,

        • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Computer science involves all sciences of computing. It has materials science, logics, maths galore, just to do basic circuitry and chip design. It spirals on and on and on to get a real computer.

          The point is it is a culmination of MANY different disciplines, and the people who think it’s only “this” or “that” are demonstrating their great lack of knowledge on the subject.

          It is a generic term because it takes MANY different things to complete the picture. Pidgeonholing things when you do not even understand them is only an excercise of ignorant stereotyping.

          • schmidtster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            That’s too broad, there’s a reason there is already computer science, science itself, science of chemistry/physics/biology/space etc.

            Language is fluid, not accepting change just shows how ignorant you are of the broader aspects of the world.