3 ms·

Even in the best case scenario for LLMs, they aren't mind readers. They'll be time savers. They're more like compilers for language to code, like how actual com

Even in the best case scenario for LLMs, they aren't mind readers. They'll be time savers. They're more like compilers for language to code, like how actual compilers transform code to assembly. The job has changed before, it will change again. It may get easier to enter the industry, but the industry will still exist and will still need subject matter experts a decade from now.

dgellow 2y ago
I don’t feel LLMs are the good tool for that. It’s nice to have something that behaves as if it understood my requests and business model, but we need reproducibility, otherwise it’s too unpredictable. I also don’t like English as a language to express requirements, it’s not strict enough and depends too much on an implicit context. Whatever high-level abstraction we end up with it cannot be something that results in the wrong implementation because the agent incorrectly read the tone of the exchange.
- kristianc 2y ago
  > Whatever high-level abstraction we end up with it cannot be something that results in the wrong implementation because the agent incorrectly read the tone of the exchange. That can easily be said of most Product Manager > SWE relationships too though
- lunarboy 2y ago
  That's why code was invented in the first place no? But now LLMs are in the ballpark where lay people can describe something vaguely and get a working MVP. Whether you can ship, scale, and debug that code is a completely different question
  - hooverd 2y ago
    Lay people can pour concrete and nail boards together; that doesn't mean they'll lay a good foundation and erect a square frame.
    - soco 2y ago
      Nobody (or nobody in their right mind) argues that AI should be let by itself build productive applications. How about using it as a willing helping hand? I do that and it's really helping me, provided I actually know what it's trying to do and I will correct course - both by re-prompting and by writing the missing pieces by hand. That gives me extra speed, not magical powers.
      - bluefirebrand 2y ago
        > Nobody (or nobody in their right mind) argues that AI should be let by itself build productive applications There are people on hacker news daily arguing this
        Macha 2y ago
        And major tech CEOs.
AbstractH24 2y ago
> Even in the best case scenario for LLMs, they aren't mind readers. They'll be time savers. In otherwords, they are cheaper mid to entry level employees which don’t get sick or have emotions. I think most people would agree with this. One of the reasons well informed curious people tend to underestimate the value of LLMs despite their flaws is they underestimate the amount of routine work that could be automated but is still done imperfectly by humans. LLMs lower the barrier to entry to halfway decent automation and eliminating those jobs. Where I’m not sold yet is on the whole idea of bots that go off and do their own thing totally unsupervised (but increasingly, you are having models supervise one another).

dgellow 2y ago

I don’t feel LLMs are the good tool for that. It’s nice to have something that behaves as if it understood my requests and business model, but we need reproducibility, otherwise it’s too unpredictable. I also don’t like English as a language to express requirements, it’s not strict enough and depends too much on an implicit context. Whatever high-level abstraction we end up with it cannot be something that results in the wrong implementation because the agent incorrectly read the tone of the exchange.

kristianc 2y ago
> Whatever high-level abstraction we end up with it cannot be something that results in the wrong implementation because the agent incorrectly read the tone of the exchange. That can easily be said of most Product Manager > SWE relationships too though
lunarboy 2y ago
That's why code was invented in the first place no? But now LLMs are in the ballpark where lay people can describe something vaguely and get a working MVP. Whether you can ship, scale, and debug that code is a completely different question
- hooverd 2y ago
  Lay people can pour concrete and nail boards together; that doesn't mean they'll lay a good foundation and erect a square frame.
  - soco 2y ago
    Nobody (or nobody in their right mind) argues that AI should be let by itself build productive applications. How about using it as a willing helping hand? I do that and it's really helping me, provided I actually know what it's trying to do and I will correct course - both by re-prompting and by writing the missing pieces by hand. That gives me extra speed, not magical powers.
    - bluefirebrand 2y ago
      > Nobody (or nobody in their right mind) argues that AI should be let by itself build productive applications There are people on hacker news daily arguing this
      - Macha 2y ago
        And major tech CEOs.

AbstractH24 2y ago

> Even in the best case scenario for LLMs, they aren't mind readers. They'll be time savers. In otherwords, they are cheaper mid to entry level employees which don’t get sick or have emotions. I think most people would agree with this. One of the reasons well informed curious people tend to underestimate the value of LLMs despite their flaws is they underestimate the amount of routine work that could be automated but is still done imperfectly by humans. LLMs lower the barrier to entry to halfway decent automation and eliminating those jobs. Where I’m not sold yet is on the whole idea of bots that go off and do their own thing totally unsupervised (but increasingly, you are having models supervise one another).