Code writers and prose writers will be reduced to operating the AI (checking its output, trying various inputs to elicit the desired language text). At least we won't be completely obsolete like the taxi drivers and Lee Se-dol:
The South Korean Go champion Lee Se-dol has retired from professional play, telling Yonhap news agency that his decision was motivated by the ascendancy of AI.
“With the debut of AI in Go games, I’ve realized that I’m not at the top even if I become the number one through frantic efforts,” Lee told Yonhap. “Even if I become the number one, there is an entity that cannot be defeated.”
To speed your obsolescence, make sure you use Codex in your work, so it can learn you completely. Remember, you won't be able to compete with people who use Codex, so you have to feed the machine, whether you like it or not.
Competitive chess is still alive and well despite computers being better than humans for decades now.
In fact, computers enhance chess by allowing the discovery of interesting lines that a human would never have thought of. Professionals use computer engines to study, and learn from.
I'm super excited to play with Codex, for much the same reasons - it will help me do stuff that would be boring to do otherwise.
I don't actually see this happening. Why would you want to replace real knowledge with something that generates demonstrably flawed code a lot of the time?
It might be used to generate boilerplate and scaffolding, but for more complex stuff, I don't see a way around having the operator having deep programming knowledge themselves, such that they could've written the code themselves anyway.
And if they already have deep programming knowledge, why is trying to coddle the model into generating what you want it to generate better than just writing it out yourself?
It's more about the attribute that a certain task radiates. Cars have a greater velocity, humans don't seem to care very much, other animals achieve such a feat, too. On the other hand, Go and Chess radiate an aura of intellectual prowess, if you were someone who spent his entire life playing a board game, just to be curb stomped by something coming out of thin air, your pride would falter. And that is basically what it's all about. Pride.
Professional Chess is going along fine 20+ years after DeepBlue achievement, Kasparov hardly retired after that because "AI" could do better.
While Alpha's success was a surprise at the time, it was always known that it was just a matter of time before there was a unbeatable engine.
Achievements as a human has not diminished because a machine can do it better. Body building, weightlifting , running or shooting or pretty much any sport really as has not diminished despite there being better machines and even other biological species which can do better than us.
Every sport has classes for competition, male/female, seniors, under-XX, heavy weight etc. Serena loosing badly against 203rd ranked smoking male player ( albeit at 16th not yet at her peak ) did not reduce her pride in her game or reduces her achievements in anyway.
My point merely is, that humans seem to think to have a monopole on intellectual superiority. If you were to call someone else stupid, there's a high probability they'd feel the urge to punch you in the face, unless that person is already apathetic in nature. And to my perception, slightly superior intelligence seems to be the only thing we humans have going for us. Speed, Strength? such attributes have become terribly trivial.
Sure. And instead of writing code ("running") you can operate Codex ("drive the car"). Instead of being a runner, you'll be a driver. And gradually the car will drive itself, and you can sit and watch.
