3 ms·

This is a poor take. We need to stop slop and low effort issues/PRs. Stopping AI generated code is a lost battle because detecting that in high quality work is

• o11c 11mo ago
  If people can't make a good (PR, story, or whatever) without AI, they certainly can't do it with AI, because using the AI is strictly more difficult - it requires all the original skill, plus the skill to work around the AI's quirks. This is arguably isomorphic to Kernighan's Law: > Everyone knows that debugging is twice as hard as writing a program in the first place. So if you’re as clever as you can be when you write it, how will you ever debug it?
  • wilya7 11mo ago
    Are you sure about that? Can you make the opposite case and steel-man it? Until you can, a stupid LLM will be smarter than you are. I can write a PR now. I can code now. Probably not as good as you can, but before LLMs I couldn't. I tried for decades learning to code. My brain is a Top-down network, I can see the big picture very quickly, but I cannot maintain focus to build bottom-up. Now I don't have to. I use LLMs to set the goal, to examine all corner cases, to define the milestones, to predict the wrong turns, to write a human-readable spec, to break it down to units of test code, to write the blue-prints of units of code. I can test them, and debug them with LLMs. The end result can be sub-optimal, but it runs, it does what I want, is well documented, and is maintainable. Before LLMs I couldn't do any of that. In doing all this, I get better at the bottom-up thing, just by trying. We are a spectrum of people. Do not assume the world is like you.
    • SkiFire13 11mo ago
      It seems either your LLM is 10x better than anything I've ever used or your standards are 10x lower.