It reads like something written by a time traveler from the past.
An Honest Review of AI Programming
31–40 of 89 posts
Re: An Honest Review of AI Programming
#32At the risk of sharing an unpopular take, this reads a lot like someone who decided how they feel about LLM-driven engineering ~5 months ago and doesn’t seem to reflect the current reality.
(Or they’re working in an organization with lower budgets and not cranking the frontier models of today)
I fully agree about the cost/sustainability parts, but to suggest you can’t build a high quality coding/verifying/iterating loop for _most_ problems is disingenuous.
Re: An Honest Review of AI Programming
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd like to hear actual rebuttals to those quotes.
> Hallucinations are an inherent property of how LLMs work. While technically true the hallucination rates on modern models is low and other checks can ensure that by the time a human sees it it is most likely solid. For research there is more danger as there is less feedback loop other than other LLM scrutinising the first. For research I get it to come to a conclusion but provide me with links so I can judge. More…
> it it is most likely solid.
Most likely? That’s not reassuring at all. So you’re saying the other checks can result in hallucinations?
Re: An Honest Review of AI Programming
#34At the risk of sharing an unpopular take, this reads a lot like someone who decided how they feel about LLM-driven engineering ~5 months ago and doesn’t seem to reflect the current reality. (Or they’re working in an organization with lower budgets and not cranking the frontier models of today) I fully agree about the cost/sustainability parts, but to suggest you can’t build a high quality coding/verifying/iterating l…
His experience is completely plausible. He’s in a niche that requires highly performant code and most complex, highly performant games do nit have source available for models to train on. It’s a very common observation that the farther you stray from mainstream, the less effective the LLM models become.
Re: An Honest Review of AI Programming
#35It reads like something written by a time traveler from the past.
We are all time travelers from the past.
Re: An Honest Review of AI Programming
#36> An Honest Review > I do admit that this approach immediately triggered my contrarian side and made me very defiant of any AI tool. Makes sense. > While this could be partially remedied by always asking for a primary source or citation, I dislike the idea that one has to add magical incantations to their queries to get the right results. It’s a good laugh to make fun of “make no mistake” memes, until you start havin…
Not providing a source is how Llms get caught in sycophancy and hallucinations. The “tool” needs improvement, especially one that claims it’s intelligence. How would you react if you found out after schooling everything you learned has half-hallucinated because your teacher made it up and there is no text book or historical log of facts? You had assumed this whole time you were learning facts…now what?
Re: An Honest Review of AI Programming
#37At the risk of sharing an unpopular take, this reads a lot like someone who decided how they feel about LLM-driven engineering ~5 months ago and doesn’t seem to reflect the current reality. (Or they’re working in an organization with lower budgets and not cranking the frontier models of today) I fully agree about the cost/sustainability parts, but to suggest you can’t build a high quality coding/verifying/iterating l…
5 months ago people said the exact same things, you know. That this stuff was how it was 5 months before that, and doesn't reflect the current reality.
Re: An Honest Review of AI Programming
#38> “Agentic workflow” (or whatever they’re calling it at the time you’re reading this article) > Unlike the silver bullets of the past (like microservices or NoSQL) > Hallucinations are an inherent property of how LLMs work. > It’s all marketing and buzzwords Not a serious article or thinker. I can get this stuff on Reddit if I want to read thrice-regurgitated cliches about AI.
The author is a real C++ programmer. Not like the PyTorch guys who use std::shrared_ptr for cyclical graphs and then go on to overpromise on threaded Python only to find out that the slowdown is much larger and everything is brittle as expected years ago.
The times that Meta people can browbeat honest engineers are over.
Nice corporate take.
Re: An Honest Review of AI Programming
#39> An Honest Review > I do admit that this approach immediately triggered my contrarian side and made me very defiant of any AI tool. Makes sense. > While this could be partially remedied by always asking for a primary source or citation, I dislike the idea that one has to add magical incantations to their queries to get the right results. It’s a good laugh to make fun of “make no mistake” memes, until you start havin…
How are they supposed to be used? The providers promised us we could just say what we wanted and get it.
Re: An Honest Review of AI Programming
#40At the risk of sharing an unpopular take, this reads a lot like someone who decided how they feel about LLM-driven engineering ~5 months ago and doesn’t seem to reflect the current reality. (Or they’re working in an organization with lower budgets and not cranking the frontier models of today) I fully agree about the cost/sustainability parts, but to suggest you can’t build a high quality coding/verifying/iterating l…
> this reads a lot like someone who decided how they feel about LLM-driven engineering ~5 months ago and doesn’t seem to reflect the current reality.
I've been reading this for 2 years straight. "oh you have a criticism of AI? Well they fixed that in Aeternos v Y-point-Z, which after doing all of my work also gave my wife an orgasm for the first time this year, obviously OP is using the old model".