3 ms·

This is exactly true in my experience. I find myself trusting the LLM better than I ever trusted a development team to deliver accurate work. Just like you wo

This is exactly true in my experience. I find myself trusting the LLM better than I ever trusted a development team to deliver accurate work. Just like you would managing a team of junior developers, you have to keep an eye on the output, but I think the agent is more transparent about that than your team would be. And it works faster, and you don't have to deal with emotional meltdown or active sabotage if you criticize in the wrong way. The trick for the guy controlling the agent is to know about the gotchas that one would normally encounter when doing the work. Asking the right questions and mentioning the right things to pay extra attention to can make all the difference. I think that's why it will be much more difficult for people to learn how to make software now. Those of us who have been doing it for years and years have experience that is valuable in steering the LLM. It will be hard for people new to software to get that same experience. But then things are changing so quickly right now, everything I just wrote my be irrelevant in a week.

skydhash 17d ago
> find myself trusting the LLM better than I ever trusted a development team to deliver accurate work That’s the main issue. You’re talking about the development side guarante, while the most important is the user side guarantee. There’s a lot of talk about liking LLM interaction, but no comments about the software quality, which for a lot of SaaS has gone downhill. It’s why they emphasized LoC and number of PRs but hide the number of bug tickets. Which is why the most enthusiastic comments are about projects not released yet. Greenfield and released projects are different.
- Izkata 17d ago
  > but no comments about the software quality, which for a lot of SaaS has gone downhill. It’s why they emphasized LoC and number of PRs but hide the number of bug tickets. And here's some numbers (gathered from telemetry over time) showing that: https://www.faros.ai/blog/ai-acceleration-whiplash-takeaways https://www.faros.ai/blog/ai-acceleration-whiplash-takeaways Here's someone's breakdown (with some things from the full report that aren't in the Faros blog post), showing how it's even worse than first impressions: https://unessays.substack.com/p/talk-is-cheap https://unessays.substack.com/p/talk-is-cheap

skydhash 17d ago

> find myself trusting the LLM better than I ever trusted a development team to deliver accurate work That’s the main issue. You’re talking about the development side guarante, while the most important is the user side guarantee. There’s a lot of talk about liking LLM interaction, but no comments about the software quality, which for a lot of SaaS has gone downhill. It’s why they emphasized LoC and number of PRs but hide the number of bug tickets. Which is why the most enthusiastic comments are about projects not released yet. Greenfield and released projects are different.

Izkata 17d ago
> but no comments about the software quality, which for a lot of SaaS has gone downhill. It’s why they emphasized LoC and number of PRs but hide the number of bug tickets. And here's some numbers (gathered from telemetry over time) showing that: https://www.faros.ai/blog/ai-acceleration-whiplash-takeaways https://www.faros.ai/blog/ai-acceleration-whiplash-takeaways Here's someone's breakdown (with some things from the full report that aren't in the Faros blog post), showing how it's even worse than first impressions: https://unessays.substack.com/p/talk-is-cheap https://unessays.substack.com/p/talk-is-cheap