4 ms·
> What you're basically saying here is: you should just learn more and know more faster. I didn't say anything about speed. I think you should take the time to
by MaKey 2y ago
> What you're basically saying here is: you should just learn more and know more faster.
I didn't say anything about speed. I think you should take the time to deeply understand what you are working on.
> And what I'm saying is: that's exactly what LLM's are super useful for.
I disagree, LLMs aren't good teachers. You won't be able to spot subtle issues with their output if you're not already familiar with the topic.
> To answer your last question: about every 6 months or so. [...]
I don't see the big advantage of using an LLM there. It can't set up the environment for you.
- bboygravity 2y ago> I don't see the big advantage of using an LLM there. It can't set up the environment for you. I can give it tons of random documentation without having to read through it to understand what parts are useful without having to filter through the irrelevant/mistyped/outdated/badly written stuff, even give it undocumented (shitty old) code and ask specific questions about how it works or what the likely intention was. I promise you it is useful to me. I use it every day. It can't set up the environment for me all by itself, but it sure can help me do it WAY faster and understand it way faster. Especially the boring stuff nobody wants to do. PS: who has time to deeply understand all aspects of what they are working on? This makes no sense to me in the context of a job. If I would take time to deeply understand every tool, script or even source code I touch, I would NEVER get to doing ANY work.