2 ms·

The analogy I'd use is using LLMs for coding is like a movie director does for movies. A movie director does not draw storyboards, they ask an H.I. (Human Intel

The analogy I'd use is using LLMs for coding is like a movie director does for movies. A movie director does not draw storyboards, they ask an H.I. (Human Intelligence) storyboard artists to do that. They don't make the costumes they ask an H.I. costume maker to do that. They don't control the camera they ask a H.I. camera person to do that. They don't usually act, they ask H.I. actors to do that. They don't make the soundtrack, they ask an H.I. composer to do that. They don't edit the video the ask in H.I. editor to do that. Further, they don't just accept what each of those H.I.s does on their first try. The most visible example is when the H.I. actors don't act exactly as the director wants, they retake the scene. But, the same is true of all the rest. As the "director" they "direct" each of those H.I.s toward their vision. IT seems similar for coding with an LLM. I become the director. I direct the LLM. I check it's results and if they are unacceptable I re-take with instruction on how to do things closer to what I actually want.

jfengel 2mo ago
You can always tell a director who does do their own storyboards. The film is always visually bats**. In a good way. I'm looking at you, Guillermo del Toro.
antipurist 2mo ago
One major difference is that H.I. often cares for the outcome, so directing them is enough. LLM has no capacity to care, it is just a tool, more like watercolors that you paint with than a H.I. storyboard artist that can promise you meaningful results.
- maya335 2mo ago
  The watercolor framing is closer to my experience than the director one. A director can assume the camera person will push back if a shot is unusable. An LLM will cheerfully hand you something that compiles, looks polished in the demo path, and quietly fails on the cases you didn't spell out. Retakes help, but only if you already know which frames are wrong. That's the part of the steak essay that lands for me: the machine will follow a recipe at scale. Judging "this is charcoal dressed as medium-rare" is still on you.
- BrandonM 2mo ago
  That and you can find good people that get your vision or just do good work and use them on your next project. Or you can mentor a promising person. Etc. Mapping HI to AI as the gp did misses all the major deficiencies of collaborating with a team of agents vs competent humans.

jfengel 2mo ago

You can always tell a director who does do their own storyboards. The film is always visually bats**. In a good way. I'm looking at you, Guillermo del Toro.

antipurist 2mo ago

One major difference is that H.I. often cares for the outcome, so directing them is enough. LLM has no capacity to care, it is just a tool, more like watercolors that you paint with than a H.I. storyboard artist that can promise you meaningful results.

maya335 2mo ago
The watercolor framing is closer to my experience than the director one. A director can assume the camera person will push back if a shot is unusable. An LLM will cheerfully hand you something that compiles, looks polished in the demo path, and quietly fails on the cases you didn't spell out. Retakes help, but only if you already know which frames are wrong. That's the part of the steak essay that lands for me: the machine will follow a recipe at scale. Judging "this is charcoal dressed as medium-rare" is still on you.
BrandonM 2mo ago
That and you can find good people that get your vision or just do good work and use them on your next project. Or you can mentor a promising person. Etc. Mapping HI to AI as the gp did misses all the major deficiencies of collaborating with a team of agents vs competent humans.