4 ms·
I've been seeing lots of demos like this, especially with games. Yes, they are impressive, but I'm surprised nobody is talking about some of the things I've not
by royal__ 21d ago
I've been seeing lots of demos like this, especially with games. Yes, they are impressive, but I'm surprised nobody is talking about some of the things I've noticed with GPT-6: the code it writes, by default, is surprisingly messy and obviously unmaintainable. It's also very...not human. No human would write code like it does. I get the sense that the optimization of these models on benchmarks is causing their behavior to morph into a very brute-force type of approach. It makes you think: when code is suddenly very cheap, does good style and organization even matter as much? Or were those just important for humans? (I think they still do, for the record).
- ViktorRay 21d agoWonder if someone might use an LLM to specifically vibe code a program that takes LLM code and makes it appear like non-LLM code.
- randyrand 21d agoIt matters, for now. - I prompt better when I can understand the code, when necessary - I can catch wrong assumptions it made more easily - Good code helps the AI too, AFAICT
- thefourthchime 21d agoI haven't looked at the code honestly, but it's a interesting observation. My impression of the way OpenAI is going is instead of making a larger model smarter, they're going wide with just extremely high effort and a lot of parallel agents to get towards a goal. For example, for design and architecture, I prefer fable, but for pull requests I like GPT because it's so pedantic about things.