281–290 of 504 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Friendly suggestion: your post contains a mix of interesting points and ad hominim attacks. People will be more likely to engage with your main assertion if you leave out the insults.
Is that like when "respected poster" jascuqesm implied I'm an asshole?
I noticed your account was new, so I thought you might appreciate a likely explanation for why your post was being downvoted.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Suppose almost all work in the future is done via LLMs, just like almost all transportation is done today via cars instead of horses. Do you think your worldview is still a reasonable one under those conditions?
That would only be a world where the copyright and other IP uncertainties around the output (and training!) of LLMs were a solved and known question. So that's not the world we currently live in.
There clearly should be, but that is not the world we live in.
Zig has a similar stance on no-LLM policy https://codeberg.org/ziglang/zig#strict-no-llm-no-ai-policy
If you rely on llms, you're simply not going to make it. The person who showed their work on the math test is 9/10 times is doing better in life than the person that only knew how to use a calculator. Now how do we think things are going to turn out for the person that doesn't even think they need to learn how to use a calculator. Just like when people started losing their ability to navigate without a GPS/Maps app,…
I am old now, and the unfortunate truth is that my brain isn't working as fast or as precise as when I was young. LLMs help me maintain some of my coding abilities.
It's like having a non-judgemental co-coder sitting at your side, you can discuss about the code you wrote and it will point out things you didn't think of.
Or I can tap into the immense knowledge about APIs LLMs have to keep up with change. I wouldn't be able to still read that much documentation and keep all of this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hugely unpopular opinion on HN, but I'd rather use code that is flawed while written by a human, versus code that has been generated by a LLM, even if it fixes bugs. I'd gladly take a bug report, sure, but then I'd fix the issues myself. I'd never allow LLM code to be merged.
[flagged]
The underlying data that said matrices compute upon, can be racist though.
I will admit that I may be missing some context though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I say let people hold this stance. We, agentic coders, can easily enough fork their project and add whatever the features or refinements we wanted, and use that fork for ourselves, but also make it available for others in case other people want to use it for the extra features and polish as well. With AI, it's very easy to form a good architectural understanding of a large code base and figure out how to modify it in…
> We, agentic coders, can easily enough fork their project And this is why eventually you are likely to run the artisanal coders who tend to do most of the true innovation out of the room. Because by and large, agentic coders don't contribute, they make their own fork which nobody else is interested in because it is personalized to them and the code quality is questionable at best. Eventually, I'm sure LLM code quali…
Isn't that literally how open-source works, and why there's so many Linux distros?
Code quality is a subjective term as well, I feel like everyone dunking on AI coding is a defensive reaction - over time this will become an entirely acceptable concept.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, that’s why my forks of all their libraries with bugs fixed such as https://github.com/pmarreck/zigimg/commit/52c4b9a557d38fe1e1... will never ever go back to upstream, just because an LLM did it. Lame, but oh well- their loss. Also, this is dumb because anyone who wants fixes like this will have to find a fork like mine with them, which is an increased maintenance burden.
> Also, this is dumb because anyone who wants fixes like this will have to find a fork like mine with them Or a human will provide the fix?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Because it takes a massive amount of developer work You know what else takes "a massive amount of developer work"? "any LLM-generated code must be reviewed by a good programmer" And this is the crux of the matter with using LLMs to generate code for everything but really simple greenfield projects: They don't really speed things up, because everything they produce HAS TO be verified by someone, and that someone HAS…
The submitter is supposed to be the good programmer; if not, then maintainers may or may not review it themselves depending on the importance of the feature. And yes of course they need to be able to write the code themselves, but that's the easy part: any good developer could write a full production OS by themselves given access to documentation and literature and an enormous amount of time. The problem is the time.
And how will that be assured? Everyone can open a PR or submit a bug.
> The problem is the time.
But not the time spent TYPING.
The problem is the time spent THINKING. And that's a task that LLMs, which are nothing other than statistical models trying to guess the next token, really aren't good at.
Zig has a similar stance on no-LLM policy https://codeberg.org/ziglang/zig#strict-no-llm-no-ai-policy
If you rely on llms, you're simply not going to make it. The person who showed their work on the math test is 9/10 times is doing better in life than the person that only knew how to use a calculator. Now how do we think things are going to turn out for the person that doesn't even think they need to learn how to use a calculator. Just like when people started losing their ability to navigate without a GPS/Maps app,…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I went into software because I like building things and coming up with solid solutions to business problems that are of use to society. I would not describe myself with "love to code". It's a means to an end to pay bills and have a meaningful career. I think of myself more like a carpenter or craftsman. I used a coding agent for the majority of my current project and I still got the "build stuff" itch scratched becau…
> I think of myself more like a carpenter or craftsman. > I used a coding agent for the majority of my current project and I still got the "build stuff" itch scratched because Engineers are still responsible for the output and they are needed to interface between technical teams, UX, business people etc Then you are the opposite of a carpenter or a craftsman, no matter what you think about it yourself.