Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Learning to code is still worthwhile

stevekrouse.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 326 posts

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#141

Post by osti »

taybin wrote: post #120

> Code is a beautiful form of creative expression, as rich as literature or music I think this is overstating it and makes me wonder how familiar the author is with literature and music. Most programming is closer to plumbing. We come in, gripe about the guy who did the prior job, and solve a puzzle with some unique constraints. The reason LLMs are good at coding is because with coding we want boring, banal code.

Most programming is that, but most music and literature are probably uninspired junks as well. But there are many beautiful algorithms (such as the ones in Knuths books) that are more beautiful than any music for me personally.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#142

Post by lowbloodsugar »

woodpanel wrote: post #135
irjustin wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For now, I can imagine a not too distant future where this is largely untrue. LLMs are an abstraction just like machine code -> assembly -> C/JVM -> some lang -> LLMs? At some point you stopped needing to understand the layer down because the layer you were on became so good. Yes there are always corner cases, but for the vast majority of developers/engineers out there, staying at your layer was enough to make a care…

There is a always going to be the gap of what you can do with LLMs if you know how to code vs if you don’t

This is only true if it plateaus. What you are saying is “I don’t think LLMs will achieve superintelligence.” Which is a fine opinion to have, but it’s an opinion.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#143

Post by lowbloodsugar »

taybin wrote: post #120

> Code is a beautiful form of creative expression, as rich as literature or music I think this is overstating it and makes me wonder how familiar the author is with literature and music. Most programming is closer to plumbing. We come in, gripe about the guy who did the prior job, and solve a puzzle with some unique constraints. The reason LLMs are good at coding is because with coding we want boring, banal code.

The coding we want for industry sure. Difference between IKEA and my uncle, an incredible, sought after carpenter.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#144

Post by bitwize »

exfalso wrote: post #51
adamddev1 wrote: post #33

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't AI agents replacing the coding mostly being done on the outer layers of development? I mean, end user applications, apps, dashboards, business applications? On this "outer crust" people can maybe tolerate things with 99% accuracy, or bloated code. A vibe coded app can be argued to be "good enough." (Even then, look at the disaster that Microsoft apps have become post AI adop…

There are ways to do it correctly. You just end up spending a lot of time conceptualizing and refining abstractions. To me the issue is more that conceptualizing requires a certain state of mind. Before llms it was 10% hard thinking 90% implementing. Implementation was actually sort of a reward, it felt so good just being in the zone and fleshing out ideas. Post llms I find myself walking up and down quite a lot, onl…

Somebody talking about researchers, I think it was Hamming, once said that there are people who just can't think without a bench full of equipment in front of them. So if you want to get good work out of them, your job as a lab director, then, is to give them that bench full of equipment and let 'em cook. I think the same thing is true of some programmers, and I think I might be one of them. We could sit around and conceptualize till we're blue in the face, but without an editor open with code in it we can't think through our conceptualizations effectively, and a chatbot is no substitute. A chatbot just adds another layer of abstraction to a process that's already thick with them, like a wall that got repainted so many times it's covered in a few millimeters of stratified goo that partially melts in the summer, and what's worse its behavior cannot be meaningfully predicted or reasoned about. Everything you think you know about how to correctly get results out of an LLM is either guesswork or folklore, and may be obsolete by Labor Day.

This also partially explains why I'm fond of Lisp. Paul Graham once said that while Lisp is a great language to work in, its real value comes as a language for thinking in.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#145

Post by grandimam »

I have always found similarities between programming and filmmaking.

Programmer being the director and the LLM being the entire apparatus upon which the film/software is built. This became evident to me while doing spec-driven development for a few of my projects where I specify the constraints upon which the software should be build, but have limited control over the performance similar to how a director has limited control over an actor's performance.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#146

Post by altmanaltman »

taybin wrote: post #120

> Code is a beautiful form of creative expression, as rich as literature or music I think this is overstating it and makes me wonder how familiar the author is with literature and music. Most programming is closer to plumbing. We come in, gripe about the guy who did the prior job, and solve a puzzle with some unique constraints. The reason LLMs are good at coding is because with coding we want boring, banal code.

Finally my turn to shine! I learned how to play guitar for like a decade before I got into programming. I also write a lot and have some small novels I have finished.

I feel your analogy is right but it can extend to anything. Plumbing is a job, programing is a job and yes its basically the same process if you see at as a job.

But what OP means is the skill/ability of programming rather than the job of it. Think of a professional musician that plays cruise ships, their job is also like plumbing in the way you describe, which would mean its also just like programming in terms of a job.

Yet the skill/art to me has a lot to do with the art of music or the art of writing. All of them can be channels for creativity while forcing you to do very hard work on the mechanics. I cannot say the same about the art of plumbing where you do have the mechanics and need to work on it but it doesn't require cerativity or allow you to channel it.

I am currently working on a blog trying to explain concurrency and parallelism using the song "Free Bird".

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#147

Post by pophenat »

If you can’t code, you’ll be like a mathematician or statistician who can’t do basic math because they have tools that can do it for them. We don’t tell kids they don’t need to know how to do basic math operations because they have Excel and calculators.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#148

Post by MikeTheGreat »

altmanaltman wrote: post #146
taybin wrote: post #120

> Code is a beautiful form of creative expression, as rich as literature or music I think this is overstating it and makes me wonder how familiar the author is with literature and music. Most programming is closer to plumbing. We come in, gripe about the guy who did the prior job, and solve a puzzle with some unique constraints. The reason LLMs are good at coding is because with coding we want boring, banal code.

Finally my turn to shine! I learned how to play guitar for like a decade before I got into programming. I also write a lot and have some small novels I have finished. I feel your analogy is right but it can extend to anything. Plumbing is a job, programing is a job and yes its basically the same process if you see at as a job. But what OP means is the skill/ability of programming rather than the job of it. Think of a…

> I am currently working on a blog trying to explain concurrency and parallelism using the song "Free Bird"

Ok, now I'm hooked :)

What's your blog? I don't suppose it has an RSS feed, hopefully? :)

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#149

Post by woodpanel »

lowbloodsugar wrote: post #142
woodpanel wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a always going to be the gap of what you can do with LLMs if you know how to code vs if you don’t

This is only true if it plateaus. What you are saying is “I don’t think LLMs will achieve superintelligence.” Which is a fine opinion to have, but it’s an opinion.

once, if ever, the plateauing happens. Until then there is going to be this gap.

In other words, superintelligence often referred to as AGI might either be months away or just VC-Money induced cult-speak many fall victim to.

It doesn’t matter because the only certainty is that it’s not here now, and neither tomorrow etc.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#150

Post by al_borland »

steve_adams_86 wrote: post #123
al_borland wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Steve Jobs used to say that everyone should learn to program, because it teaches you how to think. https://youtu.be/BRTOlPdyPYU

Lately I wonder if people should learn philosophy because it teaches you how to reason, what to reason about, and why. Just like with programming, you’re constantly forced to interrogate your impressions and reconsider what you took for granted. It’s an extremely useful exercise. Nothing will show you how wrong you constantly are like testing the logic of a program you wrote. It’s a bit like learning to program, but…

> We do need people to practice thinking and self-interrogation far more than we do today.

I think a lot of people are turning to AI for this, which can be dangerous if they haven’t already developed these critical thinking skills.

Post reply on HN