How to keep up with AI/ML as a full stack dev? • Hacker News Board

Re: How to keep up with AI/ML as a full stack dev?

#81

Post by mnky9800n » Mon, Aug 19, 2024, 8:17 PM UTC

ynniv wrote: post #39

alisonatwork wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is what does programming with an LLM get you over batteries-included frameworks with scaffolding like Rails or Django? If the problem only requires a generic infra solution put together by an LLM instead of a bespoke setup, why not look into low-code/no-code PaaS solutions to start with? Unless the LLM is going to provide you with some uniquely better results than existing tools designed to solve the sam…

The question is what does programming with an LLM get you over batteries-included frameworks with scaffolding like Rails or Django? Three years ago an LLM would conversationally describe what the code would look like. Two years ago it might crib common examples with minor typos. Last year it could do something that isn't on StackOverflow at the level of an intern. Earlier this year it could do something that isn't on…

I read these stories about using LLMs and I always wonder if it's survivor bias. Like I believe your experience. I've also had impressive results. But also a lot of times the ai gets lost and doesn't know what to do. So I'm willing to see it as a developer tool, but it's hard to see it become more general purpose in the next 6 months time frame people have been promising for the last two years.

Re: How to keep up with AI/ML as a full stack dev?

#82

Post by emseetech » Wed, Aug 21, 2024, 5:50 AM UTC

KerryJones wrote: post #79

emseetech wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But given a large project, does any of that really average out to a multiple? Or is just a nice to have? This is what I keep encountering. It's all very focused on boilerplate or templating or small functions or utility. But at some point of code complexity, what is the % of time saved really? Especially considering the amount of ai babysitting and verification required. AI code obviously cannot be trusted even if it…

I'm 20+ years here and want to just call out it's a bit of a "moving goal posts with "but given a large project" comment. I do think it is helpful in large projects, but much less so. I think the other comment gives a good example of how it can be useful, and it seems fairly obvious as context sizes are increasing exponentially in a short amount of time that it will be able to deal with large projects soon. When usin…

Sure, but advocates are talking about multiples of increased productivity, and how can that be defended if it doesn't scale to a project of some size and complexity? I don't care if I get a Nx increase on a small script or the beginning of a project. That's never been the pain point in development for me.

If someone said that, over a significant amount of time and effort, these tools saved them 5% or maybe even 10% then I would say that seems reasonable. But those aren't the kinds of numbers advocates are claiming. And even then, I'd argue that 5-10% comes with a cost in other areas.

And again, not to belabor the point, but where are the in-depth workflows published for senior engineers to get these productivity increases? Not short YouTube videos, but long form books and playlists and tutorials that we can use to replicate and verify the results?

Don't you think that's a little suspect that we haven't been flooded with them like we are with every other new technology?

Re: How to keep up with AI/ML as a full stack dev?

#83

Post by emseetech » Wed, Aug 21, 2024, 6:01 AM UTC

ynniv wrote: post #76

emseetech wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But given a large project, does any of that really average out to a multiple? Or is just a nice to have? This is what I keep encountering. It's all very focused on boilerplate or templating or small functions or utility. But at some point of code complexity, what is the % of time saved really? Especially considering the amount of ai babysitting and verification required. AI code obviously cannot be trusted even if it…

20+ years here. I've been exploring different ways of using them, and this is why I recommend that people start exploring now. IntelliJ with Copilot was an interesting start, but ended up being a bit of a toy. My early breakthrough was asking chat interfaces to make something small, then refine it over a conversation. It's very fast until it starts returning snippets that you need to fold into the previous outputs. W…

I said above I've been using them for a year. How much dirtier do my hands need to be?

Re: How to keep up with AI/ML as a full stack dev?

#84

Post by KerryJones » Wed, Aug 21, 2024, 9:33 PM UTC

emseetech wrote: post #82

KerryJones wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm 20+ years here and want to just call out it's a bit of a "moving goal posts with "but given a large project" comment. I do think it is helpful in large projects, but much less so. I think the other comment gives a good example of how it can be useful, and it seems fairly obvious as context sizes are increasing exponentially in a short amount of time that it will be able to deal with large projects soon. When usin…

Sure, but advocates are talking about multiples of increased productivity, and how can that be defended if it doesn't scale to a project of some size and complexity? I don't care if I get a Nx increase on a small script or the beginning of a project. That's never been the pain point in development for me. If someone said that, over a significant amount of time and effort, these tools saved them 5% or maybe even 10% t…

No, I don't think it's suspect, because it seems like you're looking at a narrow-focus of productivity increase.

"advocates are talking about multiples of increased productivity", some are, some are not, and I don't think most people are, but sure, there's a lot of media hype.

It seems like the argument is akin to many generalized internet arguments "these [vague people] say [generality] about [other thing]".

There are places that I do think that it can make significant, multiples of difference, but it's in short spurts. Taking over code bases, learning a new language, non-tech co-founders can get started without a tech co-founder. I think it's the Jr Engineers that have a greater chance of being replaced, not the sr engineer.