Live data from Hacker News

I genuinely don't understand why some people are still bullish about LLMs

twitter.com

301–310 of 1001 posts

Re: I genuinely don't understand why some people are still bullish about LLMs

#301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that people who don't believe LLMs to be AGI are not very good at Venn diagrams. Because they certainly are artificial, general, and intelligent according to any dictionary.

By this argument the DEA is the FBI because they are also a federal bureau that does investigations.

I'm dead right now.

Re: I genuinely don't understand why some people are still bullish about LLMs

#302
post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the things that’s hard about these discussions is that behind them is an obscene amount of money and hype. She’s not responding to realists like you. She’s responding to the bulls. The people saying these tools will be able to run the world by the end of this year, maybe next. And that’s honestly unfair to you since you do awesome realistic and level headed work with LLM. But I think it’s important when having…

Possibly a reaction to Bill Gates recent statements that it will begin replacing doctors and teachers. It's ridiculous to say LLMs are incredibly useful and valuable. It's highly dubious to think they can be trusted with actual critical tasks without careful supervision.

I think it's ridiculous to say LLMs are NOT "incredibly useful and valuable", but I 100% agree that it's "highly dubious to think they can be trusted with actual critical tasks without careful supervision".

Re: I genuinely don't understand why some people are still bullish about LLMs

#303

I’ve used Claude today to: Write code to pull down a significant amount of public data using an open API. (That took about 30 seconds - I just gave it the swagger file and said “here’s what I want”) Get the data (an hour or so), clean the data (barely any time, gave it some samples, it wrote the code), used the cleaned data to query another API, combined the data sources, pulled down a bunch of PDFs relating to the d…

So much about this seems inauthentic. The post itself. The experience. The content produced. I wouldn’t like to be on the other end of the production of this content.

This just sounds like a normal day for someone who does research and analysis in 2025.

Where do you think expert analysis comes from?

Talk to experts, gather data, synthesize, output. Researchers have been doing this for a long time. There's a lot of grunt work LLM's can really help with, like writing scripts to collect data from webpages.

Re: I genuinely don't understand why some people are still bullish about LLMs

#304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes engineers a hell of a lot more efficient and opens up software to a whole new class of people. There is plenty of data to back this up. Based on that alone it’s worth quite a lot.

It does let beginners do a lot more than they are capable of currently. But these are people that wanted to be in programming in the first place. This "my mom can now code and got a job because of LLMs" myth, does this creature really exist in the wild?

No, it lets good engineers parallelize work. I can be adding a route to the backend while Cline with Sonnet 3.7 adds a button to the frontend. Boilerplate work that would take 20-30 minutes is handled by a coding agent. With Claude writing some of the backend routes with supervision, you've got a very efficient workflow. I do something like this daily in a 80k loc codebase.

Re: I genuinely don't understand why some people are still bullish about LLMs

#305
I think that to understand the diversity of opinions, we have to recognize a few different categories of users:

Category 1: people who don't like to admit that anything trendy can also be good at what it does.

Category 2: people who don't like to admit that anything made by for-profit tech companies can also be good at what it does.

Category 3: people who don't like to admit that anything can write code better than them.

Category 4: people who don't like to admit that anything which may be put people out of work who didn't deserve to be put out of work, and who already earn less than the people creating the thing, can also be good at what it does

Category 5: people who aren't using llms for things they are good at

Category 6: people who can't bring themselves to communicate with AIs with any degree of humility

Category 7: people to whom none of the above applies

Re: I genuinely don't understand why some people are still bullish about LLMs

#306

I get so confused on this. I play around, test, and mess with LLMs all the time and they are miraculous. Just amazing, doing things we dreamed about for decades. I mean, I can ask for obscure things with subtle nuance where I misspell words and mess up my question and it figures it out. It talks to me like a person. It generates really cool images. It helps me write code. And just tons of other stuff that astounds me…

Perhaps you have already paid off your mortgage and saved up a million dollars for retirement? And you're not threatened by dismissal or salary reduction because supposedly "AI will replace everyone." By the way, you don't need to be a 50+ year old nerd. Nerds are a special culture-pen where smart straight-A students from schools are placed so they can work, increase stakeholder revenues, and not even accidentally be…

[deleted]

Re: I genuinely don't understand why some people are still bullish about LLMs

#307
I was previously a non believer in LLMs, but I've come around to accepting them. Gemini has saved me so much time and energy it's actually insane. I wouldn't be able to do my work to my satisfaction (which is highly technical) without its support.

Re: I genuinely don't understand why some people are still bullish about LLMs

#308

My experience (almost exclusively Claude), has just been so different that I don't know what to say. Some of the examples are the kinds of things I explicitly wouldn't expect LLMs to be particularly good at so I wouldn't use them for, and others, she says that it just doesn't work for her, and that experience is just so different than mine that I don't know how to respond. I think that there are two kinds of people w…

every time someone brings up "Code that doesn't need to deal with edge cases" I like to point at that such code is not likely to be used for anything that matters

I’m always amazed in these discussions how many people apparently have jobs doing a bunch of stuff that either doesn’t need to be correct or is simple enough that it doesn’t require any significant amount of external context.

Re: I genuinely don't understand why some people are still bullish about LLMs

#309
post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's like computer graphics and VR: Amazing advances over the years, very impressive, fun, cool, and by no means a temporary fad... ... But I do not believe we're on the cusp of a Lawnmower-Man future where someone's Metaverse eats all the retail-conference-halls and movie-theaters and retail-stores across the entire globe in an unbridled orgy of mind-shattering investor returns . Similarly, LLMs are neat and have so…

Ah yes, the "computer graphics, which has generated billions upon billions of revenue and change are just a fad" argument. What next, "This Internet thing was just a fad" or "The industrial age was a fad"?

That is not at all what they are saying. If you seriously think that, you have serious reading comprehension problems.

Re: I genuinely don't understand why some people are still bullish about LLMs

#310
post #286

I get so confused on this. I play around, test, and mess with LLMs all the time and they are miraculous. Just amazing, doing things we dreamed about for decades. I mean, I can ask for obscure things with subtle nuance where I misspell words and mess up my question and it figures it out. It talks to me like a person. It generates really cool images. It helps me write code. And just tons of other stuff that astounds me…

Folks really over index when an LLM is very good for their use case. And most of the folks here are coders, at which they're already good and getting better. For some tasks they're still next to useless, and people who do those tasks understandably don't get the hype. Tell a lab biologist or chemist to use an LLM to help them with their work and they'll get very little useful out of it. Ask an attorney to use it and…

It sounds like you're trying to use these llms as oracles, which is going to cause you a lot of frustration. I've found almost all of them now excel at imitating a junior dev or a drunk PhD student. For example the other day I was looking at acoustic sensor data and I ran it down the trail of "what are some ways to look for repeating patterns like xyz" and 10 minutes later I had a mostly working proof of concept for a 2nd order spectrogram that reasonably dealt with spectral leakage and a half working mel spectrum fingerprint idea. Those are all things I was thinking about myself, so I was able to guide it to a mostly working prototype in very little time. But doing it myself from zero would've taken at least a couple of hours.

But truthfully 90% of work related programming is not problem solving, it's implementing business logic. And dealing with poor, ever changing customer specs. Which an llm will not help with.

Post reply on HN