4 ms·
> This started a game of whack-a-mole where the LLM would also attempt to change the pre-commit hooks! I had to fix it by denying […] When will people acknowle
by Msurrow 1y ago
> This started a game of whack-a-mole where the LLM would also attempt to change the pre-commit hooks! I had to fix it by denying […]
When will people acknowledge that LLMs are stochastic text generators?
This whole blog reads like trying to fit a square into a round hole. And frankly most of the comments in this thread is jumping right on the wagon “what water?”-style [1]
By all means use LLMs for what they can be useful for but god damnit when they are not useful please acknowledge this and stop trying to make everything a nail for the LLM-hammer.
LLMs are. not. intelligent. They don’t have a work ethic that says “oh maybe skipping tests is bad”. If they generate output that skips tests it’s because a high enough part of the training data contained that text sentence.
[1] fish joke
- lucianbr 1y agoThe whack-a-mole thing is a huge "this thing is not useful" indicator to me, and I am really confused how other people don't see it. Ok, there's an agent and the agent is able to figure out stuff and do stuff on its own. Great. But it's trying to cheat and instead of doing what I'm asking it just tries to go the easiest fastest way to claim "job done". How is that useful? If I had an intern do this I would seriously consider getting rid of them. This is elementary school stuff. Do the assignment, don't cheat. Does useful software get written by people who don't understand this basic fact?
- project2501a 1y agoYeah, pretty much. This feels like a piece of "how do i vibe-code the command line, while my options vest" How about you learn what the heck you are doing?