3 ms·
> or they suggested an elaborate and tedious workaround that would technically solve the problem (but introduce new ones). There is no value in randomly choosi
by eviks 1y ago
> or they suggested an elaborate and tedious workaround that would technically solve the problem (but introduce new ones).
There is no value in randomly choosing an API that exists. There is value in choosing an API that works.
When LLM makes up an API that doesn't even exist it indicates that it's not tied to the reality of the task of fetching a working API, so filtering out nonexistent APIs will not help the other results match better. But yes, they'll compile.
- tptacek 1y agoGive me a break. First, that's not the claim the article makes. Second, that's not the experience of anybody who actually uses Claude Code or Gemini Desktop or whatever people are using this week. This is what I'm talking about: people just gaslighting. LLMs can write truly shitty code. I have a <50% hit rate on stuff I don't have to rewrite, with Sketch.dev, an agent I like a lot. But they don't fail the way you or this article claim they do. Enough.
- eviks 1y agoFirst, it is, you've just reduced the forest article claim down to a single tree to make it appear like your "solution" cuts it. Second, speak for yourself, you have no clue about everybody's experience to make such a universal claim. Lastly, the article talks about author's experience, not yours, so you're the only one who can gaslight the author, not the other way around
- tptacek 1y agoI'm comfortable with the assertions I'm making here and stand by them.