2 ms·
These discussions are so tiring. Yes, they're bad now, but they'll get better in a year. If the generative ability is good enough for small snippets of code,
by preommr 1y ago
These discussions are so tiring.
Yes, they're bad now, but they'll get better in a year.
If the generative ability is good enough for small snippets of code, it's good enough for larger software that's better organized. Maybe the models don't have enough of the right kind of training data, or the agents don't have the right reasoning algorithms. But it is there.
- CivBase 1y agoProblem is, as the author points out, designing software solutions is a lot more complicated than writing code. AI might get better in a year, but when will it be good enough? Does our current approach to AI even produce an economical solution to this problem, even if it's technically possible?
- phyzome 1y agoI've been hearing "they'll be better in a few months/years" for a few years now.
- Esophagus4 1y agoBut hasn’t the ecosystem as a whole been getting better? Maybe or maybe not on the models specifically, but ChatGPT came out and it could do some simple coding stuff. Then came Claude which could do some more coding stuff. Then Cursor and Cline, then reasoning models, then Claude Code, then MCPs, then agents, then… If we’re simply measuring model benchmarks, I don’t know if they’re much better than a few years ago… but if we’re looking at how applicable the tools are, I would say we’re leaps and bounds beyond where we were.
- gitaarik 1y agoSo what's your point exactly? That LLMs cán write software, just not yet?