> Do you truly not see how you are actually continuing the trend of shifting the goalpost every time someone is critical about the use of LLMs A late reply, bu

> Do you truly not see how you are actually continuing the trend of shifting the goalpost every time someone is critical about the use of LLMs A late reply, but the point is that the old models are harder to get good results with, even in agentic mode. Therein lies the "massive difference in outputted code quality between models" I mentioned. So using the newest models with the right approach quite easily leads to good results, which is what I meant with: "At this point, if your coding experience with LLMs sucks I'd say there is an 80% chance that you're just doing it wrong." This as opposed to the original final claim made by the person I was replying to: "Just roll the dice correctly." That implies that it is just about getting lucky with almost random output. It hasn't been that way for a long time, unless you really try to get the LLM to fail. > With LLMs you need to effectively babysit them on each project again. Only if you're doing it badly. Document and point the AI at documentation properly. Your onboarding process and documentation should not rely on people anyway. Write Once, Read Many.