61–70 of 1001 posts
i would be may more impressed if LLMs could do code compression. more code == more things that can break, and when llms can generate boatloads of it with a click you can imagine what might happen
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The elitism of programmers who think the boilerplate code they write for 25% of the job, that's already been written before by 1000 other people before, is in fact a valuable use of company time to write by hand again. IMO it's only really an issue if a competent human wasn't involved in the process, basically a person who could have written it if needed, then they do the work connecting it to the useful stuff, and h…
you probably underestimate the endless miles of verbose code that are possible, by human or machine but especially by machine.
Why work at big businesses anymore? Let's just create more startups.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think the public cares wether their code is written by machines or real people as long as the product works.
Just today, Google Calendar asked me whether I wanted the "easy" or "depressed" colour scheme.
i would be may more impressed if LLMs could do code compression. more code == more things that can break, and when llms can generate boatloads of it with a click you can imagine what might happen
I agree. It seems like counting lines of generated code is like counting bytes/instructions of compiled code - who cares? If “code” becomes prompts, then AI should lead to much smaller code than before. I’m aware that the difference is that AI-generated code can be read and modified by humans. But that quantity is bad because humans have to understand it to read or modify it.
I think he's trying to promote AI, somehow raises questions about thrir code quality among some
Most of the code must be what could be snippets (opening files and handling errors with absl::, and moving data from proto to proto). One thing that doesn't help here, is that when writing for many engineers on different teams to read, spelling out simple code instead of depending on too many abstractions seems to be preferred by most teams.
I guess that LLMs do provide smarter snippets that I don't need to fill out in detail, and when it understands types and whether things compile it gets quite good and "smart" when it comes to write down boilerplate.
More lines == more shit to maintain. Complex lines == the shit is unmanageable.
But wall street investors love simplistic narratives such as More X == More revenue. So here we are. Pretty clever marketing imo.