I would have agreed a few weeks ago. But I can't anymore, the limitation I see is scope size and not capability. And available context sizes will just get bigger
Have you seen LLM play chess? They would not best an average 6 years old who just learned the rules. I doubt giving them more context would help. There are some thing you can't just parrot your way out.
And I would easily argue that it's harder to copy the behavior of a good software engineer than it is to copy the moves of a good chess players.
Not even talking about understanding the business logic you are actually implementing. Which LLM seems as far as understanding chess.
It’s the hype cycle. Are LLMs going to become invaluable to software engineering? Definitely. Are they going to do everything everyone on X says they will? Probably not. Right now we’re in the peak of inflated expectations. Anecdotally I’ve been using Claude to help me write a C# CLI tool from scratch. The more lines I let it write, the less and less I understand the code. Can I copy/paste it and it works? Probably 9…
This matches my experience. There's a place for LLMs in exploratory research. There's a place for LLMs in scaffolding code that would otherwise be too tedious to write. But where real decisions need to be made by those with "skin in the game", LLMs are a disaster. Vibe coding quickly falls off a cliff. They create code architectures that no human would given the context, and as a result no human can feasibly understa…
When it's too rotted, organizations plan to replace the whole system and pay 10x the price of what it would have cost to do it right in the first place, costly migration consulting mission, bullshit stuff and noise everywhere. The mid/long-term game is where the opportunity lies if you are a dev. The cycle is kind of safe for software engineer to me. Jus there won't be a place for HTML/CSS integrator, untalented PHP dev copy / pasting of random PHP function from SO anymore as it use to be 15 years ago. Those are cooked.
I would have agreed a few weeks ago. But I can't anymore, the limitation I see is scope size and not capability. And available context sizes will just get bigger
Well, until Claude Code ends the game(maybe in a few months), yeah. Today we're not there yet, even with full codebase knowledge. At least from my experience and how I want it to be done. For some, the damage has already been done. Wait & see !
I've seen it do so stupid things I am still afraid running each query. It honestly kinda stressful to keep up with, when it starts breaking things. More like a super fast trainee than a coworker to depend on. Yet do damn efficient to work with
I would have agreed a few weeks ago. But I can't anymore, the limitation I see is scope size and not capability. And available context sizes will just get bigger
Have you seen LLM play chess? They would not best an average 6 years old who just learned the rules. I doubt giving them more context would help. There are some thing you can't just parrot your way out. And I would easily argue that it's harder to copy the behavior of a good software engineer than it is to copy the moves of a good chess players. Not even talking about understanding the business logic you are actually…
As I see it I am directing it while constantly watching, controlling and questioning it.
I wouldnt let it do anything on larger code bases, but building highly specialized services or components IS crazy efficient, when you question ever move.