4 ms·

Then those projects will fail and they won't do that anymore. Or they'll succeed and engineers will have to find harder problems to solve. If a new grad + LLM

Then those projects will fail and they won't do that anymore. Or they'll succeed and engineers will have to find harder problems to solve. If a new grad + LLM can do task X about as well as an experienced engineer can, then the experienced engineer will have to find other harder problems to solve. Personally I think labor efficiency is good; why waste your labor on easy/solved problems?

foogazi 4y ago
> then the experienced engineer will have to find other harder problems to solve. The experienced engineer also gets an LLM though
- testtesttesst 4y ago
  > The experienced engineer also gets an LLM though Say experienced engineer Edna was working on a project and the new grad Nelson replaced her because he was cheaper and about as good if both have LLMs, i.e., Edna + LLM ≈ Nelson + LLM even though Edna >> Nelson. So Edna needs to find a project to work on where LLMs don't equalize her arbitrage, i.e., Edna + LLM >> Nelson + LLM and Nelson needs one where Nelson + LLM >> LLM.
  - noobermin 4y ago
    My contention is "how do you determine if someone was 'as good'?" Very likely the people in the position to make a decision will not be qualified enough to even make that decision. IF (and really only if) such a determination is possible, then sure, I agree, find harder problems etc, but I assert that people will not make that determination (which is close to impossible to make) well, if at all because that wasn't the point in the first place.
    - testtesttesst 4y ago
      Project succeeds = good. Project fails = bad. If a bunch of projects given to NG + LLM fail, the company will say at some point "this is no good, let's not do that anymore". If they mostly succeed, they'll do it more. From a middle manager's perspective, where they're funding 10-20 projects, this kind of measurement is feasible and carries at least some signal. So I don't agree it's difficult to measure.

foogazi 4y ago

> then the experienced engineer will have to find other harder problems to solve. The experienced engineer also gets an LLM though

testtesttesst 4y ago
> The experienced engineer also gets an LLM though Say experienced engineer Edna was working on a project and the new grad Nelson replaced her because he was cheaper and about as good if both have LLMs, i.e., Edna + LLM ≈ Nelson + LLM even though Edna >> Nelson. So Edna needs to find a project to work on where LLMs don't equalize her arbitrage, i.e., Edna + LLM >> Nelson + LLM and Nelson needs one where Nelson + LLM >> LLM.
- noobermin 4y ago
  My contention is "how do you determine if someone was 'as good'?" Very likely the people in the position to make a decision will not be qualified enough to even make that decision. IF (and really only if) such a determination is possible, then sure, I agree, find harder problems etc, but I assert that people will not make that determination (which is close to impossible to make) well, if at all because that wasn't the point in the first place.
  - testtesttesst 4y ago
    Project succeeds = good. Project fails = bad. If a bunch of projects given to NG + LLM fail, the company will say at some point "this is no good, let's not do that anymore". If they mostly succeed, they'll do it more. From a middle manager's perspective, where they're funding 10-20 projects, this kind of measurement is feasible and carries at least some signal. So I don't agree it's difficult to measure.