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

LLMs reward expertise

seangoedecke.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 607 posts

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#151

Post by suzzer99 »

keeda wrote: post #114
neilv wrote: post #44

> In the 2010s, if you had technical gaps (say, you couldn’t write CSS), you had to either rely on a skilled colleague or just hope that the answer to your exact problem was out there on the internet. You could read some general reference/guide/tutorial documentation on CSS, and then probably solve your problem (without searching for "how to center a div", or whatever your exact problem was, and copy&pasting the answ…

I think you're talking about a different type of expertise from TFA. Consider this: What if I never enjoyed frontend programming and so I never wanted to be an expert on that? In fact, I never enjoyed frontend programming because it was such a pain to deal with matters I considered trivial yet so frustratingly hard to do right... like centering a div. And yet the slightest misalignment is visually jarring and forces…

> like centering a div

We'll of course you're gonna be frustrated if you start with the hardest problem in HTML :/

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#153

Post by GPerson »

petcat wrote: post #74
bumblehean wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Hours + Hours of reading and a lot of trial-and-error. The loop was so long and sooo slow. But that's how you learn...

We don't need to learn CSS anymore. Just like we don't need to learn ASM since GCC does a great job generating it from higher-level code.

Learning ASM will actually teach you a lot about how the computer works, and I doubt learning CSS deeply teaches you much about design fundamentals.

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#154

Post by Avicebron »

xvfLJfx9 wrote: post #137
abixb wrote: post #73

The amplifying mirror analogy works best here. LLMs are ultimately a reflection of your own interactions with its weights, the tone you use, the structure with which you construct your prompt, aspects of an issue you tend to focus on, your breadth of vocabulary and world knowledge and whatnot. People who (carefully) use it as an extension of their own mind and senses will very likely thrive, and those who use it as a…

That sounds useful. Can you share that skill?

Not the OP but you can whack this into your prompt and get most of the way there: "no jargon goes unearned, nothing gets dumbed down, every abstraction touches ground"

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#155

Post by suzzer99 »

bumblehean wrote: post #68
petcat wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You could read some general reference/guide/tutorial documentation on CSS, and then probably solve your problem Hours + Hours of reading and a lot of trial-and-error. The loop was so long and sooo slow. Now it's instant. As if your very first Google search just solved the problem for you immediately.

>Hours + Hours of reading and a lot of trial-and-error. The loop was so long and sooo slow. But that's how you learn...

The problem with CSS is it's a) all broad and no depth and b) constantly adding major new paradigms. If you don't get up to speed and stay there, you lose it.

Pre-AI I'd say I've gotten over the hump 3 times with CSS, only to lose it again by the next time I had to use it in volume.

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#156

Post by dbalatero »

chr15m wrote: post #135
dbalatero wrote: post #126

> Of course both are useful, but I’d rather have familiarity with the codebase than a deep general understanding of software systems. In my experience, getting that familiarity with a particular codebase in a way that isn't surface-level has always been a hands-on process. E.g. just because I know many general things about software, I need to know the particulars of the current codebase I'm in to know what is reasona…

Read the code.

Reading it is good, but working with it more directly seems to help retention.

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#157

Post by Levitz »

Greed wrote: post #141
chr15m wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read the code.

What if the code sucks, because it was vibe coded by an LLM over a dozen disparate sessions?

Then that's the point. You know the code sucks, the guy who vibecoded it either didn't know or didn't care. That's the added value.

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#159

Post by champagnepapi »

michaelchisari wrote: post #90
kwakubiney wrote: post #69

Might be a very noob question but in this era of LLMs, let me ask the reverse, how do you gain expertise? It seems this rewards people who had expertise pre LLMs, but what about people who don’t have that in a specific domain? What approaches are viable now in this current system?

Same way you get strong in an age of heavy machinery: Lift heavy weights yourself. Skills will have to be built through artificial constraints. Pen & paper, reading books, not using AI, etc.

this 100%. Skills are gained via effort. Not too much effort that it discourages you, but enough so it's a challenge and engages you. Ofc it helps to have wonderful teachers, coaches, mentors, books, even ai to help guide you, but YOU must put in the effort. You don't get something for nothing.
Post reply on HN