5 ms·

You pay junior devs way way way more money for the privilege of them being bad. And since they're human, the juniors themselves do not have the patience of an

You pay junior devs way way way more money for the privilege of them being bad. And since they're human, the juniors themselves do not have the patience of an LLM. I really would not want to be a junior dev right now... Very unfair and undesirable situation they've landed in.

mentos 1y ago
At least it’s easier to teach yourself anything now with an LLM? So maybe it balances out.
- sorcerer-mar 1y ago
  I think it's actually even worse: it's easier to trick yourself into thinking you're teaching yourself anything. Learning comes from grinding and LLMs are the ultimate anti-intellectual-grind machines. Which is great for when you're not trying to learn a skill!
  - jyounker 1y ago
    Yeah, you have to be really careful about how you use LLMs. I've been finding it very useful to use them as teachers, or to use them in the same way that I'd use a coworker. "What's the idiomatic ways to write this python comprehension in javascript?" Or, "Hey, do you remember what you call it when..." And when I request these things I'll try to ask in the most generic way possible so that I then get retype the relevant code, filling in the blanks with my own values. That's just one use though. The other is treating it like it's a jr developer, which has its own shift in thinking. Practice in writing details specs goes a long way here.
    - sorcerer-mar 1y ago
      100% agreed. > Practice in writing details specs goes a long way here. This is an additional asymmetric advantage to more senior engineers as they use these tools
  - tnel77 1y ago
    >>Learning comes from grinding Says who? While “grinding” is one way to learn something, asking AI for a detailed explanation and actually consuming that knowledge with the intent to learn (rather than just copy and pasting) is another way. Yes, you should be on guard since a lot of what it says can be false, but it’s still a great tool to help you learn something. It doesn’t completely replace technical blogs, books, and hard earned experience, but let’s not pretend that LLMs, when used appropriately, don’t provide an educational benefit.
    - djeastm 1y ago
      Sure, but easy in, easy out. Hard earned experience is worth soo much more than slick summaries of the last twenty years of blog articles.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - sorcerer-mar 1y ago
      Pretty much all education research ever points to the act of actually applying knowledge, especially against variable cases, to be required to learn something. There is no learning by consumption (unfortunately, given how we mostly attempt to "educate" our youth). I didn't say they don't or can't provide an educational benefit.
      - fullstackchris 1y ago
        Some of the best software learning I ever had when I was starting out was following along with video courses and writing the code line by line along with the instructor... or does this not count as "consumption"?
        sorcerer-mar 1y ago
        > I was... following along and writing the code line by line That's application. Then presumably you started deviating a little bit from exactly what the instructor was doing. Then you deviated more and more. If you had the instructor just writing the code for every new deviation you wanted to build and you just had to mash the "Accept Edit" button, you would not have learned very effectively.
  - andy99 1y ago
    Even though I think most people know this deep down, I still don't think we actively realize how optimized LLMs are towards sounding good. It's the ultra processed food version of information consumption. People are super lazy (economical if you like) and rlhf et al have optimized LLM output to being easy to digest. Consequence is you get a bunch of output that looks really good as long as you don't think about it (and they actively promotes not thinking about it) that you don't really understand, and that if you did dig into you'd realize is empty fluff or actively wrong. It's worse than not learning, it's actively generating unthinking but palatable garbage that's the opposite of learning.
drewlesueur 1y ago
I think it would be great to be a junior dev now and be able to learn quickly with llms.
- lelanthran 1y ago
  > I think it would be great to be a junior dev now and be able to learn quickly with llms. I'm not so sure; I get great results (learning) with them because I can nitpick what they give me, attempt to explain how I understand it and I pretty much always preface my prompts with "be critical and show me where I am wrong". I've seen a junior use it to "learn", which was basically "How do I do $FOO in $LANGUAGE". For that junior to turn into a senior who prompts the way I do, they need a critical view of their questions, not just answers.
- jml78 1y ago
  If you actually want to learn……… I have experienced multiple instances of junior devs using llm outputs without any understanding. When I look at the PR, it is immediately obvious. I use these tools everyday to help accelerate. But I know the limitations and can look at the output to throw certain junk away. I feel junior devs are using it not to learn but to try to just complete shit faster. Which doesn’t actually happen because their prompts suck and their understanding of the results is bad.
fallinditch 1y ago
Maybe it's the senior devs who should be the ones to worry? Seniors' attitudes on HN are often quick to dismiss AI assisted coding as something that can't replace the hard-earned experience and skill they've built up during their careers. Well maybe, maybe not. Senior devs can get a bit myopic in their specializations. Whereas a junior Dev doesn't have so much baggage, maybe the fertile brains of youth are better in times of rapid disruption where extreme flexibility of thought is the killer skill. Or maybe the whole senior/junior thing is a red herring and pure coding and tech skills are being deflated all across the board. Perhaps what is needed now is an entirely new skill set that we're only just starting to grasp.
- sorcerer-mar 1y ago
  Maybe! Probably not though.
- yakz 1y ago
  Senior devs provide better instructions to the agent, and can recognize more kinds of mistakes and can recognize mistakes more quickly. The feedback loop is more useful to someone with more experience. I had a feeling today that I should really be managing multiple instances at once, because they’re currently so slow that there’s some “downtime”.
- bakugo 1y ago
  > Maybe it's the senior devs who should be the ones to worry? Why would they be worried? Who else going to maintain the massive piles of badly designed vibe code being churned out at an increasingly alarming pace? The juniors prompting it certainly don't know what any of it does, and the AIs themselves have proven time and again to be incapable of performing basic maintenance on codebases above a very basic level of complexity. As the ladder gets pulled up on new juniors, and the "fertile brains" of the few who do get a chance are wasted as they are actively encouraged to not learn anything and just let a computer algorithm do the thinking for them, ensuring they will never have a chance to become seniors themselves, who else will be left to fix the mess?
  - CuriouslyC 1y ago
yieldcrv 1y ago
> I really would not want to be a junior dev right now... Very unfair and undesirable situation they've landed in. I don't really get this, at the beginning of my career I masquaraded as a senior dev with experience as fast as I could until it was laundered into actual experience Form the LLC and that's your prior professional experience, working for it I felt I needed to do that and that was way before generative AI, like at least a decade
beefnugs 1y ago
See if the promise was real: llms are great skill multipliers! Then it is the new renaissance of one developer businesses popping up left and right every day! Ain't nobody got time for corporate coercion hierarchy nonsense. Hmm no news about that really
jwr 1y ago
> You pay junior devs way way way more money for the privilege of them being bad. Oh, it's worse than that. You do that, and they complain that they are underpaid and should earn much, much more. They also think they are great, it's just you, the old-timer, that "doesn't get it". You invest lots of time to work with them, train them, and teach them how to work with your codebase. And then they quit because the company next door offered them slightly more money and the job was easier, too.
leptons 1y ago
>You pay junior devs way way way more money for the privilege of them being bad. I hope you don't think that what you're paying for an LLM today is what it actually costs to run the LLM. You're paying a small fraction. So much investment money is being pumped into AI that it's going to make the 2000 dot-com bubble burst look tiny in comparison, if LLMs don't start actually returning on the massive investments. People are waking up to the realities of what an LLM can and can't do, and it's turning out to not be the genie in the bottle that a lot of hype was suggesting. Same as crypto. The tech world needs a hype machine and "AI" is the current darling. Movie streaming was once in the spotlight too. "AI" will get old pretty soon if it can't stop "hallucinating". Trust me I would know if a junior dev is hallucinating and if they actually are then I can choose another one that won't and will actually become a great software developer. I have no such hope for LLMs based on my experiences with them so far.
- sorcerer-mar 1y ago
  Yeah, all fair, but I think there's enough capital to keep the gravy train rolling until the cost-per-performance actually get way, way, way below human junior engineers. A lot of the application layer will disappear when it fails to show ROI, but the foundation models will continue to have obscene amounts of money dumped into them, and the coding use case will come along with that.
- TeMPOraL 1y ago
  > I hope you don't think that what you're paying for an LLM today is what it actually costs to run the LLM. You're paying a small fraction. Depends, right? Claude Code on a Max plan is obviously unsustainable if the API costs are any indication; people can burn through the subscription price in API credits in a day or less. But otherwise? I don't feel like API pricing is that unrealistic. Compute is cheap, and LLMs aren't as energy-intensive in inference as some would have you believe (especially when they conveniently mix up training and inference). And LLMs beat juniors at API prices already. E.g. a month ago, a few hours of playing with Gemini or Claude 3.5 / 3.7 Sonnet had me at maybe $5 for a completed little MVP of an embedded side project; it would've taken me days to do it myself, even more if I hired some random fresh grad as a junior, and $5 wouldn't fund even an hour of their work. API costs would had to be underpriced by at least two orders of magnitude for juniors to compete.

mentos 1y ago

At least it’s easier to teach yourself anything now with an LLM? So maybe it balances out.

sorcerer-mar 1y ago
I think it's actually even worse: it's easier to trick yourself into thinking you're teaching yourself anything. Learning comes from grinding and LLMs are the ultimate anti-intellectual-grind machines. Which is great for when you're not trying to learn a skill!
- jyounker 1y ago
  Yeah, you have to be really careful about how you use LLMs. I've been finding it very useful to use them as teachers, or to use them in the same way that I'd use a coworker. "What's the idiomatic ways to write this python comprehension in javascript?" Or, "Hey, do you remember what you call it when..." And when I request these things I'll try to ask in the most generic way possible so that I then get retype the relevant code, filling in the blanks with my own values. That's just one use though. The other is treating it like it's a jr developer, which has its own shift in thinking. Practice in writing details specs goes a long way here.
  - sorcerer-mar 1y ago
    100% agreed. > Practice in writing details specs goes a long way here. This is an additional asymmetric advantage to more senior engineers as they use these tools
- tnel77 1y ago
  >>Learning comes from grinding Says who? While “grinding” is one way to learn something, asking AI for a detailed explanation and actually consuming that knowledge with the intent to learn (rather than just copy and pasting) is another way. Yes, you should be on guard since a lot of what it says can be false, but it’s still a great tool to help you learn something. It doesn’t completely replace technical blogs, books, and hard earned experience, but let’s not pretend that LLMs, when used appropriately, don’t provide an educational benefit.
  - djeastm 1y ago
    Sure, but easy in, easy out. Hard earned experience is worth soo much more than slick summaries of the last twenty years of blog articles.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - sorcerer-mar 1y ago
    Pretty much all education research ever points to the act of actually applying knowledge, especially against variable cases, to be required to learn something. There is no learning by consumption (unfortunately, given how we mostly attempt to "educate" our youth). I didn't say they don't or can't provide an educational benefit.
    - fullstackchris 1y ago
      Some of the best software learning I ever had when I was starting out was following along with video courses and writing the code line by line along with the instructor... or does this not count as "consumption"?
      - sorcerer-mar 1y ago
        > I was... following along and writing the code line by line That's application. Then presumably you started deviating a little bit from exactly what the instructor was doing. Then you deviated more and more. If you had the instructor just writing the code for every new deviation you wanted to build and you just had to mash the "Accept Edit" button, you would not have learned very effectively.
- andy99 1y ago
  Even though I think most people know this deep down, I still don't think we actively realize how optimized LLMs are towards sounding good. It's the ultra processed food version of information consumption. People are super lazy (economical if you like) and rlhf et al have optimized LLM output to being easy to digest. Consequence is you get a bunch of output that looks really good as long as you don't think about it (and they actively promotes not thinking about it) that you don't really understand, and that if you did dig into you'd realize is empty fluff or actively wrong. It's worse than not learning, it's actively generating unthinking but palatable garbage that's the opposite of learning.

drewlesueur 1y ago

I think it would be great to be a junior dev now and be able to learn quickly with llms.

lelanthran 1y ago
> I think it would be great to be a junior dev now and be able to learn quickly with llms. I'm not so sure; I get great results (learning) with them because I can nitpick what they give me, attempt to explain how I understand it and I pretty much always preface my prompts with "be critical and show me where I am wrong". I've seen a junior use it to "learn", which was basically "How do I do $FOO in $LANGUAGE". For that junior to turn into a senior who prompts the way I do, they need a critical view of their questions, not just answers.
jml78 1y ago
If you actually want to learn……… I have experienced multiple instances of junior devs using llm outputs without any understanding. When I look at the PR, it is immediately obvious. I use these tools everyday to help accelerate. But I know the limitations and can look at the output to throw certain junk away. I feel junior devs are using it not to learn but to try to just complete shit faster. Which doesn’t actually happen because their prompts suck and their understanding of the results is bad.

fallinditch 1y ago

Maybe it's the senior devs who should be the ones to worry? Seniors' attitudes on HN are often quick to dismiss AI assisted coding as something that can't replace the hard-earned experience and skill they've built up during their careers. Well maybe, maybe not. Senior devs can get a bit myopic in their specializations. Whereas a junior Dev doesn't have so much baggage, maybe the fertile brains of youth are better in times of rapid disruption where extreme flexibility of thought is the killer skill. Or maybe the whole senior/junior thing is a red herring and pure coding and tech skills are being deflated all across the board. Perhaps what is needed now is an entirely new skill set that we're only just starting to grasp.

sorcerer-mar 1y ago
Maybe! Probably not though.
yakz 1y ago
Senior devs provide better instructions to the agent, and can recognize more kinds of mistakes and can recognize mistakes more quickly. The feedback loop is more useful to someone with more experience. I had a feeling today that I should really be managing multiple instances at once, because they’re currently so slow that there’s some “downtime”.
bakugo 1y ago
> Maybe it's the senior devs who should be the ones to worry? Why would they be worried? Who else going to maintain the massive piles of badly designed vibe code being churned out at an increasingly alarming pace? The juniors prompting it certainly don't know what any of it does, and the AIs themselves have proven time and again to be incapable of performing basic maintenance on codebases above a very basic level of complexity. As the ladder gets pulled up on new juniors, and the "fertile brains" of the few who do get a chance are wasted as they are actively encouraged to not learn anything and just let a computer algorithm do the thinking for them, ensuring they will never have a chance to become seniors themselves, who else will be left to fix the mess?
- CuriouslyC 1y ago

yieldcrv 1y ago

> I really would not want to be a junior dev right now... Very unfair and undesirable situation they've landed in. I don't really get this, at the beginning of my career I masquaraded as a senior dev with experience as fast as I could until it was laundered into actual experience Form the LLC and that's your prior professional experience, working for it I felt I needed to do that and that was way before generative AI, like at least a decade

beefnugs 1y ago

See if the promise was real: llms are great skill multipliers! Then it is the new renaissance of one developer businesses popping up left and right every day! Ain't nobody got time for corporate coercion hierarchy nonsense. Hmm no news about that really

jwr 1y ago

> You pay junior devs way way way more money for the privilege of them being bad. Oh, it's worse than that. You do that, and they complain that they are underpaid and should earn much, much more. They also think they are great, it's just you, the old-timer, that "doesn't get it". You invest lots of time to work with them, train them, and teach them how to work with your codebase. And then they quit because the company next door offered them slightly more money and the job was easier, too.

leptons 1y ago

>You pay junior devs way way way more money for the privilege of them being bad. I hope you don't think that what you're paying for an LLM today is what it actually costs to run the LLM. You're paying a small fraction. So much investment money is being pumped into AI that it's going to make the 2000 dot-com bubble burst look tiny in comparison, if LLMs don't start actually returning on the massive investments. People are waking up to the realities of what an LLM can and can't do, and it's turning out to not be the genie in the bottle that a lot of hype was suggesting. Same as crypto. The tech world needs a hype machine and "AI" is the current darling. Movie streaming was once in the spotlight too. "AI" will get old pretty soon if it can't stop "hallucinating". Trust me I would know if a junior dev is hallucinating and if they actually are then I can choose another one that won't and will actually become a great software developer. I have no such hope for LLMs based on my experiences with them so far.

sorcerer-mar 1y ago
Yeah, all fair, but I think there's enough capital to keep the gravy train rolling until the cost-per-performance actually get way, way, way below human junior engineers. A lot of the application layer will disappear when it fails to show ROI, but the foundation models will continue to have obscene amounts of money dumped into them, and the coding use case will come along with that.
TeMPOraL 1y ago
> I hope you don't think that what you're paying for an LLM today is what it actually costs to run the LLM. You're paying a small fraction. Depends, right? Claude Code on a Max plan is obviously unsustainable if the API costs are any indication; people can burn through the subscription price in API credits in a day or less. But otherwise? I don't feel like API pricing is that unrealistic. Compute is cheap, and LLMs aren't as energy-intensive in inference as some would have you believe (especially when they conveniently mix up training and inference). And LLMs beat juniors at API prices already. E.g. a month ago, a few hours of playing with Gemini or Claude 3.5 / 3.7 Sonnet had me at maybe $5 for a completed little MVP of an embedded side project; it would've taken me days to do it myself, even more if I hired some random fresh grad as a junior, and $5 wouldn't fund even an hour of their work. API costs would had to be underpriced by at least two orders of magnitude for juniors to compete.