> it works about as well, if not better, than a human junior engineer.

I see this line of reasoning a lot from AI-advocates and honestly it's depressing. Do you see less experienced engineers as nothing more than outputters of code? Is the entire point of being "junior" at something that you can learn and grow, which these LLM tools cannot.

▲

kordlessagain 6 days ago | parent | next [-]

That's not a line of reasoning. It's an opinion, and they matter. You don't get to make opinions go away just because you don't like them and want to conflate problem sets.

	▲	lowsong 6 days ago \| parent [-]
		I'm not disputing that they believe that these models are "as good as a junior engineer", by whatever metric you want to measure that on. My point is the very fact that someone uses that as an argument in support LLMs is... profoundly sad.

▲

zamadatix 6 days ago | parent | prev [-]

They're just comparing levels of work output but you're the one assuming that must mean a junior has no other value worth engaging.