4 ms·

Funny you should make claims about my skills when you have exactly zero data about my abilities or performance. Evaluating my skills based on how I evaluated s

Funny you should make claims about my skills when you have exactly zero data about my abilities or performance. Evaluating my skills based on how I evaluated someone else's skills when they tell me about their abilities with and without a crutch, and throwing big academic sounding expressions with 'effect' in them might be intimidating to some but to me it just transparently sounds pretentious and way off mark, since, like I said, you have zero data about my abilities or output. > I'd recommend learning a bit more and practicing some humility and curiosity before condemning an entire class of engineers You're clearly coming from an emotional place because you feel slighted. There is no 'class of engineers' in my evaluation. I recommend reading comments more closely, thinking about their content, and not getting offended when someone points out signs of lacking skills, because you might just be advertising your own limitations.

soulofmischief 2y ago
> Funny you should make claims about my skills when you have exactly zero data about my abilities or performance. Didn't you just do that to an entire class of engineers: > Claiming LLMs are a massive boost for coding productivity is becoming a red flag that the claimant has a tenuous grasp on the skills necessary Anyway, > Evaluating my skills based on how I evaluated someone else's skills when they tell me about their abilities with and without a crutch Your argument rests on the assumption that LLMs are a "crutch", and you're going to have to prove that before the rest of your argument holds any water. It sucks getting generalized, doesn't it? Feels ostracizing? That's the exact experience someone who productively and effectively uses LLMs will have upon encountering your premature judgement. > You're clearly coming from an emotional place because you feel slighted. You start off your post upset that I'm "making claims" about your skills (I used the word "maybe" intentionally, multiple times), and then turn around and make a pretty intense claim about me. I'm not "clearly" coming from an emotional place, you did not "trigger" me, I took a moment to educate you about being overly judgemental before fully understanding something, and pointed out the inherent hypocrisy. > you might just be advertising your own limitations But apparently my approach was ineffective, and you are still perceiving a world where people who approach their work differently than you are inferior. Your toxic attitude is unproductive, and while you're busy imagining yourself as some masterful engineer, people are out there getting massive productivity boosts with careful application of cutting-edge generative technologies. LLMs have been nothing short of transcendental to a curious but skilled mind.
- Ygg2 2y ago
  > Didn't you just do that to an entire class of engineers Not really. He said "if you claim LLM's are next thing since sliced butter I am doubting your abilities". Which is fair. It's not really a class as much as a group. I've never been wowed over by LLMs. At best they are boilerplate enhancers. At worst they write plausibly looking bullshit that compiles but breaks everything. Give it something truly novel and/or fringe and it will fold like a deck of cards. Even latest research called LLM's benefits into question: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4945566 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4945566 That said. They are fine at generating commit messages and docs than me.
  - soulofmischief 2y ago
    > Not really. He said "if you claim LLM's are next thing since sliced butter I am doubting your abilities". Which is fair. No, OP said: > Claiming LLMs are a massive boost for coding productivity is becoming a red flag that the claimant has a tenuous grasp on the skills necessary Quotation marks are usually reserved for direct quotes, not paraphrases or straw mans. > I've never been wowed over by LLMs. Cool. I have, and many others have. I'm unsure why your experience justifies invalidating the experiences of others or supporting prejudice against people who have made good use of them. > Give it something truly novel and/or fringe and it will fold like a deck of cards. Few thoughts are truly novel, most are derivative or synergistic. Cutting edge LLMs, when paired with a capable human, are absolutely capable of productive work. I have long, highly technical and cross-cutting discussions with GPT 4o which I simply could not have with any human that I know. Humans like that exist, but I don't know them and so I'm making due with a very good approximation. Your and OP's lack of imagination at the capabilities of LLMs are more telling than you realize to those intimate with them, which is what makes this all quite ironic given that it started from OP making claims about how people who say LLMs massively boost productivity are giving tells that they're not skilled enough.
    - Ygg2 2y ago
      > Quotation marks are usually reserved for direct quotes, Not on HN. Customary is to use > paragraph quotes like you did. However I will keep that in mind. > Cool. I have, and many others have. I'm unsure why your experience justifies invalidating the experiences of others If we're both grading a single student (LLM) in same field (programming), and you find it great and I find it disappointing, it means one of us is scoring it wrong. I gave papers that demonstrate its failings, where is your counter-proof? > Your and OP's lack of imagination at the capabilities of LLMs It's not lack of imagination. It's terribleness of results. It can't consistently write good doc comments. I does not understand the code nor it's purpose, but roughly guesses the shape. Which is fine for writing something that's not as formal as code. It can't read and understand specifications, and even generate something as simple as useful API for it. The novel part doesn't have to be that novel just something out of its learned corpus. Like Yaml parser in Rust. Maybe Zig or something beyond it's gobbled data repo. > Few thoughts are truly novel, most are derivative or synergistic. Sure but you still need A mind to derive/synergize the noise of everyday environment into something novel. It can't even do that but remix data into plausibly looking forms. A stochastic parrot. Great for DnD campaign. Shit for code.

soulofmischief 2y ago

> Funny you should make claims about my skills when you have exactly zero data about my abilities or performance. Didn't you just do that to an entire class of engineers: > Claiming LLMs are a massive boost for coding productivity is becoming a red flag that the claimant has a tenuous grasp on the skills necessary Anyway, > Evaluating my skills based on how I evaluated someone else's skills when they tell me about their abilities with and without a crutch Your argument rests on the assumption that LLMs are a "crutch", and you're going to have to prove that before the rest of your argument holds any water. It sucks getting generalized, doesn't it? Feels ostracizing? That's the exact experience someone who productively and effectively uses LLMs will have upon encountering your premature judgement. > You're clearly coming from an emotional place because you feel slighted. You start off your post upset that I'm "making claims" about your skills (I used the word "maybe" intentionally, multiple times), and then turn around and make a pretty intense claim about me. I'm not "clearly" coming from an emotional place, you did not "trigger" me, I took a moment to educate you about being overly judgemental before fully understanding something, and pointed out the inherent hypocrisy. > you might just be advertising your own limitations But apparently my approach was ineffective, and you are still perceiving a world where people who approach their work differently than you are inferior. Your toxic attitude is unproductive, and while you're busy imagining yourself as some masterful engineer, people are out there getting massive productivity boosts with careful application of cutting-edge generative technologies. LLMs have been nothing short of transcendental to a curious but skilled mind.

Ygg2 2y ago
> Didn't you just do that to an entire class of engineers Not really. He said "if you claim LLM's are next thing since sliced butter I am doubting your abilities". Which is fair. It's not really a class as much as a group. I've never been wowed over by LLMs. At best they are boilerplate enhancers. At worst they write plausibly looking bullshit that compiles but breaks everything. Give it something truly novel and/or fringe and it will fold like a deck of cards. Even latest research called LLM's benefits into question: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4945566 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4945566 That said. They are fine at generating commit messages and docs than me.
- soulofmischief 2y ago
  > Not really. He said "if you claim LLM's are next thing since sliced butter I am doubting your abilities". Which is fair. No, OP said: > Claiming LLMs are a massive boost for coding productivity is becoming a red flag that the claimant has a tenuous grasp on the skills necessary Quotation marks are usually reserved for direct quotes, not paraphrases or straw mans. > I've never been wowed over by LLMs. Cool. I have, and many others have. I'm unsure why your experience justifies invalidating the experiences of others or supporting prejudice against people who have made good use of them. > Give it something truly novel and/or fringe and it will fold like a deck of cards. Few thoughts are truly novel, most are derivative or synergistic. Cutting edge LLMs, when paired with a capable human, are absolutely capable of productive work. I have long, highly technical and cross-cutting discussions with GPT 4o which I simply could not have with any human that I know. Humans like that exist, but I don't know them and so I'm making due with a very good approximation. Your and OP's lack of imagination at the capabilities of LLMs are more telling than you realize to those intimate with them, which is what makes this all quite ironic given that it started from OP making claims about how people who say LLMs massively boost productivity are giving tells that they're not skilled enough.
  - Ygg2 2y ago
    > Quotation marks are usually reserved for direct quotes, Not on HN. Customary is to use > paragraph quotes like you did. However I will keep that in mind. > Cool. I have, and many others have. I'm unsure why your experience justifies invalidating the experiences of others If we're both grading a single student (LLM) in same field (programming), and you find it great and I find it disappointing, it means one of us is scoring it wrong. I gave papers that demonstrate its failings, where is your counter-proof? > Your and OP's lack of imagination at the capabilities of LLMs It's not lack of imagination. It's terribleness of results. It can't consistently write good doc comments. I does not understand the code nor it's purpose, but roughly guesses the shape. Which is fine for writing something that's not as formal as code. It can't read and understand specifications, and even generate something as simple as useful API for it. The novel part doesn't have to be that novel just something out of its learned corpus. Like Yaml parser in Rust. Maybe Zig or something beyond it's gobbled data repo. > Few thoughts are truly novel, most are derivative or synergistic. Sure but you still need A mind to derive/synergize the noise of everyday environment into something novel. It can't even do that but remix data into plausibly looking forms. A stochastic parrot. Great for DnD campaign. Shit for code.