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

201–210 of 326 posts

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#201

Post by lenkite »

tibbar wrote: post #130
skydhash wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> LLMs are an abstraction just like machine code -> assembly -> C/JVM -> some lang -> LLMs The what is the semantic mapping between and LLMs? I know the semantic mapping between maching code and assembly (some light weight syntax manipulation and macros). I know the one between assembly and C (the C abstract machine, which is mostly about the stack and whatever call/ret instructions pair). I know the one between C an…

The non-determinism is one of the relevant features of this layer of abstraction! And one can learn to validate that the translation is being done properly. Some of the tools you have include writing extremely detailed specs, generating visualizations of the internals of the tool, or (perhaps) reading the code, though that becomes less feasible with volume. Basically it turns out that code is full of incidental detai…

Writing Specs that are thousands of lines wrong without formalism, type and correctness checking is a major PITA. Wish we had a..compiler that can check our code..err I mean spec.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#202

Post by wtfHN26 »

pydry wrote: post #187
palmotea wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...and [1] codebases for production code will be so low in quality that they will be unintelligible to humans, and [2] LLMs, too, will have trouble maintaining them. [3] At that point, coding will become a valuable skill again. You are a very optimistic person. IMHO, claims #1 & #2 will happen, but #3 won't. People, especially business leaders, will just adjust their expectations downwards (or be forced to do so).…

We've been on this merry go round before with the "outsourcing to the cheapest programmers in india" boom. That slopfest ended with a new executive dogma of "hire only the best programmers" as so many of those projects were humiliating disasters which had to be junked. I do not think that was coincidental. Executive fashions can remain remarkably consistent and irrational for years as they try to make reality conform…

Funny you say that.

Outsourcing to India never ended. The Indian Service companies kept growing over last two decades.

Now many Western companies are setting up Global Capability Centers driving strategic innovation, IT, and R&D.

So the work going to India has moved up from "outsourcing to the cheapest programmers in india" to "we will hire the best talent in India directly and set up our company's base there".

To give some credit to your point, moving some low efficiency work to India since early 2000s freed up resources for many Tech companies to invest their best programmers into more profitable ventures.

But with the GCCs being set up in India, even a lot of the innovation and R&D work is now moving to India.

If that's any indication to your parallels with companies investing in AI. Something similar can happen with AI - where low end work moves to AI first, and the over time as the Technology develops more challenging and innovative tasks move to AI.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#203

Post by HPsquared »

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.

On plumbing, there are building codes that must still be followed. I think software engineering hasn't evolved to that stage yet where it's possible to assure quality.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#204

Post by bazoom42 »

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 point of art (like music and litterature) is the art itself. Code is a craft, it is means to an end. It can still be beautiful and impressive and creative, but it is a different thing.

It is not a value judgement. Art can be bad or bland and code can be a work of genius. But the moon lander or a handmade watch are beautiful because they actually work. It can’t really be compared to music.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#205

Post by fasterik »

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.

I don't think it's overstating it at all. If anything, I would argue that code is more expressive than literature or music because it's more general. Consider the space of all possible video games, demos/intros, generative paintings, generative music, etc. which wouldn't be possible without code.

I think you're confusing the common use of a medium with expressiveness. Many uses of ordinary language also aren't that interesting, but we need to consider the full space of possibilities.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#206

Post by xikxp1 »

elestor wrote: post #189

Everybody should learn to program a computer, because it teaches you how to think - Steve Jobs

Everybody should learn to program a computer, so we could hire the best to build our products.

That's what he wanted to say. If he really meant what he said, he'd took some effort to learn himself

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#207

Post by weatherlite »

palmotea wrote: post #176
gyulai wrote: post #163

I think that, even among those who have had the ability to code since before LLMs, the skill of coding has been in atrophy, and will continue to be so over the next 10 or 20 years. Learning to code, over the same period of time, will not be worthwhile. At the end of that process, cracks in the system will start to show: Namely, we will have nothing but LLM-generated code to train future LLMs on, and codebases for pro…

> ...and [1] codebases for production code will be so low in quality that they will be unintelligible to humans, and [2] LLMs, too, will have trouble maintaining them. [3] At that point, coding will become a valuable skill again. You are a very optimistic person. IMHO, claims #1 & #2 will happen, but #3 won't. People, especially business leaders, will just adjust their expectations downwards (or be forced to do so).…

> Just think of how often some "new and improved version" drops some important feature you used without providing a good replacement? We'll get more of that. If the codebase is unmaintainable, they'll just regenerate a new pile of garbage that will change stuff randomly and call it an improvement.

Most production systems dont have such a high tolerance for embarrassing bugs. Startups can completely fail if they have too low quality. Established businesses can lose to competition if orders don't arrive, compliance has bugs etc etc. So quality has to be good enough, that's a constraint that wont go away.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#208

Post by sfn42 »

woodpanel wrote: post #149
lowbloodsugar wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

To me it looks like they've been pretty plateaued for a good while already? Sure they do marginally better on benchmarks or whatever, but to me as a user there's really not much difference between chatgpt today and chatgpt a couple years ago. Main difference is just added capabilities like web search, image recognition etc.

For coding you still need to be in control if you want a good result.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#209

Post by stackbutterflow »

swsieber wrote: post #107
DrewADesign wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. I’ve been saying that for a while (and switched fields entirely.) People were getting hung up on the idea that an LLM could not truly replace a developer, and that’s true, but it doesn’t matter. For the job market to be severely impacted, you just need to reduce the number of people required to do the parts of the job that LLMs suck at, and that only requires increased efficiency for existing developers. Even i…

> Even if your average developer is a measly 30% more efficient, that might create 20% less demand for developers I mean it might. But I wouldn't rule out Jevon's paradox where the increased efficiency increases demand. Build more roads, congestion gets worse. Make developers more efficient, demand for developers increases. I wouldn't be surprised if demand for bespoke software goes up.

I see it go in either two directions, assuming it plateaus at a marginal increase in productivity. Either this newly found productivity helps teams tackle backlog tasks that they never had the time to complete, or it's used to churn out more low quality work.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#210

Post by stackbutterflow »

Animats wrote: post #73
ekidd wrote: post #65

As a professional programmer entering the final third of an enjoyable career, I would now place "learning to code" in the same category as "making a living as a poet." As in, it's truly enjoyable art and some people appreciate it, but you'd better plan for a day job. Senior people who already know how to code are doing OKish for now, from the data I've seen, but the job is increasingly babysitting models like they we…

> As a professional programmer entering the final third of an enjoyable career, I would now place "learning to code" in the same category as "making a living as a poet." As in, it's truly enjoyable art and some people appreciate it, but you'd better plan for a day job. Not wrong. Probably. I'm reminded of an old friend from long ago. She was an early music major at Harvard, and graduated with a MFA. She was very good…

It's such a shame that our society doesn't value more, in economic terms, this type of skills.
Post reply on HN