4 ms·

> 2. It's annoying and disruptive to be interrupted when doing work that requires deep focus. Steering a LLM also requires deep focus. Unless you want to end u

by nottorp 6mo ago

> 2. It's annoying and disruptive to be interrupted when doing work that requires deep focus. Steering a LLM also requires deep focus. Unless you want to end up on accidentally quadratic or have a CVE named after your project.

loeg 6mo ago
How can it? You prompt it, then wait minutes+ for it to come back. It's the opposite of flow state.
- nottorp 6mo ago
  Flow comes after when you verify what it did...
- allannienhuis 6mo ago
  I get much better results the more thought I put into crafting my prompt. including using llms to help create that prompt. There's definitely a declining rate of return on that time, but thinking about the problem and carefully describing the context can take fairly deep thought. I do think it's in shorter bursts than when doing all of the work, but I get that same feeling of 'bah, where was I?' if I get interrupted while creating the prompt for a more complex feature. On the other hand, I spend a lot less time in flow state while debugging - it's way easier to describe a bug to an llm (often can just paste in the exception or link to error log).
- rodrigodlu 6mo ago
  I'm using my ADHD hyper focus skills while flagging issues that the LLM is doing. Reading 10x more code than before puts me straight into the zone. (In a language that I find interesting: Elixir) My own process is improving so much that I had only one bug last week that was fixed immediately after the error tracker caught. But yeah I feel more tired sooner. So it's oneto three hyper focus zones per day, just like before. The difference is that I enter faster, and now I'm not afraid of leaving the task and resuming later, since I can just ask for a summary of what we did so far. I'm using two different models from two different providers to cross check the work tho. I'm very good with bad smells I guess, after years supervising less experienced developers since early days in my long career.
- bluGill 6mo ago
  It isn't exactly flow - but at when the prompt comes back it forces me to think. Flow is about getting into a state where I'm thinking so this is surprisingly similar. The prompt is helpful because it gives me a place to focus: does the proposed changes make sense (this is much smaller than the entire code base), and given this is done: do I know anything else that was missed.
  - fmbb 6mo ago
    So you move from a maker’s schedule to a manager’s schedule. Interrupting you does not have any meaningful consequence on your ability to work because at any given moment you are not really working and when your interruption is over the prompt is still just waiting there for you.
- gowld 6mo ago
  What I do is, I'm always responding to output N while the AI is working on prompt N+1. So we are both always responding to each other's question/answer before last. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCMiyXM-1_U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCMiyXM-1_U https://shreevatsa.wordpress.com/2010/02/07/mastermind/ https://shreevatsa.wordpress.com/2010/02/07/mastermind/
- avereveard 6mo ago
  You don't wait. You run multiple independent incremental feature in parallel, while also running a code review, which will create the next set of tasks while you or the llm think up the feature to add after.
  - loeg 6mo ago
    Context switching back and forth between a dozen different things is sort of the opposite of flow state, IMO.
    - Daishiman 6mo ago
      It's not "flow state" but working on three features in parallel requires focus that's equally as fragile, at least if you want to follow the output of the LLMs and steer it if it makes mistakes.
coldtea 6mo ago
Many people today just trust whatever shit comes out. Some even brag about it, even famous devs like Yegge. And requiring review of the result is not a "flow state". Flow states means continuous and uninterrupted focus while actively performing, LLMs block and return with new code or questions for minutes on end. That's the opposite of flow, it's the "let's take a break now, see you in a few minutes" for every interaction.
- nottorp 6mo ago
  > even famous devs Are they devs or performance artists by now?

by nottorp 6mo ago

loeg 6mo ago

How can it? You prompt it, then wait minutes+ for it to come back. It's the opposite of flow state.

nottorp 6mo ago
Flow comes after when you verify what it did...
allannienhuis 6mo ago
I get much better results the more thought I put into crafting my prompt. including using llms to help create that prompt. There's definitely a declining rate of return on that time, but thinking about the problem and carefully describing the context can take fairly deep thought. I do think it's in shorter bursts than when doing all of the work, but I get that same feeling of 'bah, where was I?' if I get interrupted while creating the prompt for a more complex feature. On the other hand, I spend a lot less time in flow state while debugging - it's way easier to describe a bug to an llm (often can just paste in the exception or link to error log).
rodrigodlu 6mo ago
I'm using my ADHD hyper focus skills while flagging issues that the LLM is doing. Reading 10x more code than before puts me straight into the zone. (In a language that I find interesting: Elixir) My own process is improving so much that I had only one bug last week that was fixed immediately after the error tracker caught. But yeah I feel more tired sooner. So it's oneto three hyper focus zones per day, just like before. The difference is that I enter faster, and now I'm not afraid of leaving the task and resuming later, since I can just ask for a summary of what we did so far. I'm using two different models from two different providers to cross check the work tho. I'm very good with bad smells I guess, after years supervising less experienced developers since early days in my long career.
bluGill 6mo ago
It isn't exactly flow - but at when the prompt comes back it forces me to think. Flow is about getting into a state where I'm thinking so this is surprisingly similar. The prompt is helpful because it gives me a place to focus: does the proposed changes make sense (this is much smaller than the entire code base), and given this is done: do I know anything else that was missed.
- fmbb 6mo ago
  So you move from a maker’s schedule to a manager’s schedule. Interrupting you does not have any meaningful consequence on your ability to work because at any given moment you are not really working and when your interruption is over the prompt is still just waiting there for you.
gowld 6mo ago
What I do is, I'm always responding to output N while the AI is working on prompt N+1. So we are both always responding to each other's question/answer before last. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCMiyXM-1_U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCMiyXM-1_U https://shreevatsa.wordpress.com/2010/02/07/mastermind/ https://shreevatsa.wordpress.com/2010/02/07/mastermind/
avereveard 6mo ago
You don't wait. You run multiple independent incremental feature in parallel, while also running a code review, which will create the next set of tasks while you or the llm think up the feature to add after.
- loeg 6mo ago
  Context switching back and forth between a dozen different things is sort of the opposite of flow state, IMO.
  - Daishiman 6mo ago
    It's not "flow state" but working on three features in parallel requires focus that's equally as fragile, at least if you want to follow the output of the LLMs and steer it if it makes mistakes.

coldtea 6mo ago

Many people today just trust whatever shit comes out. Some even brag about it, even famous devs like Yegge. And requiring review of the result is not a "flow state". Flow states means continuous and uninterrupted focus while actively performing, LLMs block and return with new code or questions for minutes on end. That's the opposite of flow, it's the "let's take a break now, see you in a few minutes" for every interaction.

nottorp 6mo ago
> even famous devs Are they devs or performance artists by now?