3 ms·
Eh common theme amongst coders but I feel like it's less the LLM and more pebkac. You have a new tool, it can be hugely productive. You just need to use it righ
by gtvwill 2y ago
Eh common theme amongst coders but I feel like it's less the LLM and more pebkac. You have a new tool, it can be hugely productive. You just need to use it right. Stop expecting it to write your whole app or create new formulas for hyper complex problems that haven't yet been solved or aren't common. It's a reference tool that's better than reading the docs or browsing stack overflow. Ask it for snippets of code, break up your tasks, use it to compare a number of methods that achieve the same result, discuss with it different approaches to the same problem.
Much like how a nailgun won't just magically build you a house, it'll just let you build one quicker.
I get great benefit out of llms for coding. I'm not a good coder. But I am decent at planning and understanding what I want. Llms get me there 100x quicker than not using them. I don't need 4 years of cs to learn all the tedious algos for sorting or searching. I just ask an ai for a bunch of examples, assess them for what they are and get on with it. It can tell me the common pros and cons of it all and much like any other decision in business I make my best judgement and go with it.
Need to sort a heap of data into x y z or convert it from x to y? Llm will show me the way, now I don't need to hire someone to do it for me.
But alas, so many seem to think a language interpretation tool is actually a do it all one stop shop of production. Pebkac, your using the tool wrong.
- boredtofears 2y agoYeah, this tracks — the only ones I see blindly trusting its outputs are the ones that can’t properly identify errors in the code. Pebkac indeed. If the output works with a simple happy path test it’s deemed as working with blissful ignorance to all invariant states.