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

I Don't Want to Code with LLM's

blaines-blog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 48 posts

Re: I Don't Want to Code with LLM's

#21

Post by steve_adams_86 »

Our_Benefactors wrote: post #2

I can’t take this article seriously, and neither should you. Being anti AI/anti LLM is solidly in the Luddite camp; there’s really no more debates to be had. Every serious inquiry shows productivity gains by using ai. It’s anyone’s prerogative to continue to advocate for the horse and buggy over the automobile, but most people won’t bother to take the discussion seriously.

The Luddites had some great ideas and were driven by a more sophisticated philosophy than people tend to give them credit for. I think their motivations are still applicable and worth considering today.

Re: I Don't Want to Code with LLM's

#22

Post by elwebmaster »

“a new paradigm for software development that you must learn or be left behind” that’s a completely inaccurate statement. Nobody is saying that you will be “left behind”. It certainly is a new paradigm but it doesn’t mean the old way of doing things won’t continue to exist. Just like there are still some problems that require code to be written in C or even assembly. Just like there are hand-made goods. The size of the opportunity is a whole different story.

Re: I Don't Want to Code with LLM's

#24

Post by snickerbockers »

JohnFen wrote: post #6
Our_Benefactors wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The data showed llms are better. This put debate to rest. Now we are post-debate.

What data are you talking about? Why do you value it above the data showing the opposite?

It's superior data because it supports his expectations. His expectations are right because they are based on superior data. Checkmate Luddites.

Re: I Don't Want to Code with LLM's

#25

Post by capyba »

elwebmaster wrote: post #22

“a new paradigm for software development that you must learn or be left behind” that’s a completely inaccurate statement. Nobody is saying that you will be “left behind”. It certainly is a new paradigm but it doesn’t mean the old way of doing things won’t continue to exist. Just like there are still some problems that require code to be written in C or even assembly. Just like there are hand-made goods. The size of t…

I disagree - a lot of people with positions of power are unfortunately saying the “will be left behind “ bit

Re: I Don't Want to Code with LLM's

#26

Post by capyba »

snickerbockers wrote: post #10

>Reviewing is worse than writing I think the reason this discussion keeps coming up is that the people who are getting a lot out of these tools are people who are, at best, the software-equivalent of assembly-line workers. If something can be easily understood by passively reading it then it probably isn't complicated or novel and therefore it's not surprising a pseudorandom bullshit generator can do it for you; all…

I’m glad to hear someone say that. I’ve been wrestling for weeks with the idea of reinventing a particular wheel in my profession, for a personal coding project. The problem is that my implementation can’t ever be as complete or as useful as the existing solutions because it’s way too much for one person to accomplish in a reasonable amount of time.

But, I like it, I’ve reinvented many wheels in my work and it’s benefited me greatly. So I will reinvent this particular wheel as well…

Re: I Don't Want to Code with LLM's

#27

Post by capyba »

Our_Benefactors wrote: post #11
lmf4lol wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

give me one seriously peer reviewed study please with proper controls i wait

Go ahead and move the goalposts now... This took about 2 minutes of research to support the conclusions I know to be true. You can waste time as long as you choose in academia attempting to prove any point, while normal people make real contributions using LLMs. ### An Empirical Evaluation of Using Large Language Models for Automated Unit Test Generation We evaluate TESTPILOT using OpenAI’s gpt3.5-turbo LLM on 25 npm…

“ Productivity (measured by the number of lines of code produced) increased”

The LLM’s better have written more code, they’re a text generation machine!

In what world does this study prove that the LLM actually accomplished anything useful?

Re: I Don't Want to Code with LLM's

#28

Post by footy »

thomas_moon wrote: post #12

The only viewpoint I really agree with in this article is the "use it or lose it" mentality. Skills are developed and maintained by practicing them, but if all the author really wants to do is write code, then LLMs are literally an answer to their prayers! You can enable virtually free test driven development. Write the test names down and let the LLM implement them for you. You save 50% of your time and you get to g…

all of this sounds awful

Re: I Don't Want to Code with LLM's

#30

Post by footy »

Our_Benefactors wrote: post #11
lmf4lol wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

give me one seriously peer reviewed study please with proper controls i wait

Go ahead and move the goalposts now... This took about 2 minutes of research to support the conclusions I know to be true. You can waste time as long as you choose in academia attempting to prove any point, while normal people make real contributions using LLMs. ### An Empirical Evaluation of Using Large Language Models for Automated Unit Test Generation We evaluate TESTPILOT using OpenAI’s gpt3.5-turbo LLM on 25 npm…

> This took about 2 minutes of research to support the conclusions I know to be true

This is a terrible way to do research!

Post reply on HN