2 ms·
I’m in two minds about this, in some sense they did and it’s the same way in which the C code I write is mine, but the assembly underneath is an artifact of my
by FuckButtons 10d ago
I’m in two minds about this, in some sense they did and it’s the same way in which the C code I write is mine, but the assembly underneath is an artifact of my intent, but I owe the compiler authors for it. On the other hand the cognitive distance between my C and the assembly is likely lower, but that’s because I’ve spent time staring at what was generated in order to figure out why my code was misbehaving. Which is itself not that dissimilar to figuring out how to get better at writing code with llms.
- Terr_ 10d agoI think the difference involves how many layers of stuff someone claims is "theirs" and whether that claim of credit and expertise is valid. Imagine a coworker writes some decent C code, but then at a meeting they start taking credit for the bytecode and the default optimizations done by the compiler. That's analogous to people who write LLM prompts and then claim the same level of authorship over the code which was all generated and edited on an indirect level.
- pferde 10d agoIf you ask LLM to code something for you, and you then work on the code, then yes, there is partial ownership. Just like if you had asked another, maybe junior, developer to write a piece of code, and then you helped them make it better.