Live data from Hacker News

LLMs are making me lose my savviness

pgaleone.eu

81–86 of 86 posts

Re: LLMs are making me lose my savviness

#81
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nowhere did they say it’s learning. They said they can do more stuff now, it’s exploration.

The original article talks about 'savvy', which is to me an essence of learning. If 'exploration' is looking at walls of code you don't understand but the linter makes them look cool, you don't need LLMs for that.

Who said I was "looking at walls of code [I] don't understand"? Really, you are reading a lot into this without context.

I've been working software development for close to 40 years now. I've worked in plenty of languages, software stacks, ecosystems, from assembler to VAXen to Unix (pre-dating Linux), to cloud stacks to...well, a lot of systems.

The software ecosystem has ballooned so tremendously in that time frame that no human can really be an expert in all of them, or even in a tiny subset of all of them. As I mentioned in another comment, I couldn't be bothered to keep up with the Javascript/Typescript/Web front end drama. I don't do rollercoasters, and that ride is enough to make even the staunchest stomach heave with distress from the endless loop-de-loops.

With LLMs, I can describe a little problem unique to my problem space, inspect the output, research it and even reverse engineer it, and see how well it fits (or doesn't). This is not unlike being a software engineering manager leading teams.

When I said being able to see the results was "cool", I did not mean or imply it was about me trying to "look cool". In fact, I really don't know where that is coming from. I do this for my day job and also on the side for a lot of different causes and personal projects, and no one could give a rats ass about how "cool" I am. Seriously.

People need to stop taking this all so personally. It's a tool. Maybe you all need to step back to my world in 1981 when I first started playing with code as a kid, and compare it to 2016. The advances from '81 to '16 are probably far more dramatic than what AI is doing now.

Re: LLMs are making me lose my savviness

#82
post #50

I remember feeling a little bad the first time seeing AI create a UI as good as the one I did using a niche library and only a picture reference, when I focused on the feeling I realized it was an ego issue, nothing is stopping me from doing it by hand if I enjoyed it for itself, it's just that what I did was no longer scarce or difficult.

Not sure it's an ego issue for everyone. If your job was fun and now it's not anymore, you're having 8h a day less fun.

True, it's a different issue when you don't have a choice, but I still think the ego aspect is not explored enough.

Re: LLMs are making me lose my savviness

#83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original article talks about 'savvy', which is to me an essence of learning. If 'exploration' is looking at walls of code you don't understand but the linter makes them look cool, you don't need LLMs for that.

Who said I was "looking at walls of code [I] don't understand"? Really, you are reading a lot into this without context. I've been working software development for close to 40 years now. I've worked in plenty of languages, software stacks, ecosystems, from assembler to VAXen to Unix (pre-dating Linux), to cloud stacks to...well, a lot of systems. The software ecosystem has ballooned so tremendously in that time frame…

We miscommunicated. First, I think LLMs are a problem for newcomers in general, there is a lot of intuition that I saw that you build while tinkering at 3 A.M which makes programming easier in the long run, at least for me. For someone who invested enough time on that, such as you, can easily spot where LLMs fail and already have the knowledge to make the cogs turn. I clarified where I think LLMs are harmful at a sibling comment. This is where I think LLMs obstruct learning. 'Domain knowledge' is an important keystone for agentic coding that bypass this.

As for 'looking cool', I meant the code with its fancy formats and highlighting, no snark intended :)

LLMs are a great tool for building, especially for those who could conceivably be engineer team leads/project managers. For greenfield learning, its sub-par unless its guided well.

Re: LLMs are making me lose my savviness

#84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who said I was "looking at walls of code [I] don't understand"? Really, you are reading a lot into this without context. I've been working software development for close to 40 years now. I've worked in plenty of languages, software stacks, ecosystems, from assembler to VAXen to Unix (pre-dating Linux), to cloud stacks to...well, a lot of systems. The software ecosystem has ballooned so tremendously in that time frame…

We miscommunicated. First, I think LLMs are a problem for newcomers in general, there is a lot of intuition that I saw that you build while tinkering at 3 A.M which makes programming easier in the long run, at least for me. For someone who invested enough time on that, such as you, can easily spot where LLMs fail and already have the knowledge to make the cogs turn. I clarified where I think LLMs are harmful at a sib…

I appreciate the comment. I agree that LLMs can be a significant issue with new comers to the field, and their use in replace of foundational learning is causing real concerns for me and my company specifically.

I have found the LLMs work best where I have some knowledge already, and I can spot the gaffes and mistakes more quickly. It has to be rough on people flying them blind, as it were.

Unrelated but I have tried out LLMs on some legal research, and it has been appallingly bad. The LLMs get the gist of a lot of it, but falls down completely because the legal realm requires a certain amount of exactitude. Time and time again I will ask about laws in a certain U.S. State, and it will show me a law from Arizona or something which has no or limited applicability (you can try to cross reference other State laws in certain State courts, but usually that doesn't go very far unless it is a very novel argument).

You hit the nail on the head with the fancy outputs, I am guilty as charged there. The LLMs are frankly better at it then I am.

Re: LLMs are making me lose my savviness

#85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see this response a lot. What part of the thinking are you thinking is actually offloaded? Writing things down and then arguing with an agent that constantly gets things wrong is just a new kind of Rubber Duck. Are Rubber Ducks offloading thinking? These are more like search plus memory tools. Memory loss is real but that has been happening for me way before agents.

This came out a bit longer than I expected. Depends on your usage. A rubber duck won't upheave the entire history of written human knowledge to reach for your answer. It doesn't have inherent bias, and its purpose could also be handled by a wall, or the air infront of you if you can stretch your mind a little. What I'm going for here is that as you said, its just a hack to make your brain look for answers in a more e…

> A LLM is more akin to a senior pair programmer.

I don't know, it seems more like every question goes to a contract agency, where a random programmer answers it. Generally they are very good at bringing up relevant things you've never heard of, but depending on who gets assigned to that answer, the implementation might be copy-pastable into production, or it might be a questionable hack, or it might be workable but clearly not the right approach if you're looking for those things. The agency must work by the hour, though, because if you challenge the assertions of the previous guy, the next guy will obsequiously say that you are, of course, quite right and possibly insightful and spit out a new solution more along the lines of the new guidance.

Re: LLMs are making me lose my savviness

#86

It is opposite for me than what the author describes. With AI I can explore new areas far more effectively. For example, I have never been great with front end web stuff, but asking LLMs to generate something and then looking at the code they built is pretty cool. Of course there are errors and gaffes and weird bits all over, but that helps keep me in the loop and understanding it better. I can now (more) boldly go w…

It's great for stuff I don't care about, like figuring out complicated SQL queries, and then turning them into sqlalchemy! There's nothing so unfun as spending a day trying to get a complex query working, as you slowly discover more odds and ends about SQL than you ever thought it could ever possibly have.

But if I end up feeding it JIRA tickets, playing agent management, and being QA on the other side, that's really not the job I signed up for.

Post reply on HN