Live data from Hacker News

Teach yourself programming in ten years (1998)

norvig.com

141–142 of 142 posts

Re: Teach yourself programming in ten years (1998)

#141
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>understanding the details is orthogonal to whether you wrote the lines yourself or not Reading the code does not give you the knowledge of the 10 different approaches you would have tried and failed before coming up with that code. Why exactly a piece of code is the way that it is cannot be determined by just reading the code. Reading a mathematical proof does not give you any meaningful understanding of it.

You haven't considered that I probably already discussed 10 different approaches with my agent before authorizing a particular implementation. Or that I didn't ask about alternatives during review. You're confusing physically coding with thinking. You can still think just fine without writing code yourself. If you are experienced, attentive, curious, willing to explore, etc., that doesn't change after an LLM allows y…

>You haven't considered that I probably already discussed 10 different approaches with my agent before authorizing a particular implementation

Saying this kind of stuff kinda proves that you don't really know what you are doing.

Re: Teach yourself programming in ten years (1998)

#142
post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You haven't considered that I probably already discussed 10 different approaches with my agent before authorizing a particular implementation. Or that I didn't ask about alternatives during review. You're confusing physically coding with thinking. You can still think just fine without writing code yourself. If you are experienced, attentive, curious, willing to explore, etc., that doesn't change after an LLM allows y…

>You haven't considered that I probably already discussed 10 different approaches with my agent before authorizing a particular implementation Saying this kind of stuff kinda proves that you don't really know what you are doing.

I welcome you to explain this position instead of relying on vague attacks on character/authority.

Do you want to actually critically and healthily engage with my response instead of sliding into argumentative fallacy?

Post reply on HN