In this year of 2025, in December, I find it untenable for anyone to hold this position unless they have not yet given LLMs a good enough try. They're undeniably useful in software development, particularly on tasks that are amenable to structured software development methodologies. I've fixed countless bugs in a tiny fraction of the time, entirely accelerated by the use of LLM agents. I get the most reliable results simply making LLMs follow the "red test, green test" approach, where the LLM first creates a reproducer from a natural language explanation of the problem, and then cooks up a fix. This works extremely well and reliably in producing high quality results.

▲

skydhash 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

You're on the internet, you can make whatever claims you want. But even with no sources or experimental data, you can always add some rational logic to add weight to your claims.

> They're undeniably useful in software development

> I've fixed countless bugs in a tiny fraction of the time

> I get the most reliable results

> This works extremely well and reliably in producing high quality results.

If there's one common thing in comments that seems to be astroturfing for LLM usage, it's that they use lots of superlative adjectives in just one paragraphs.

▲

AYBABTME a day ago | parent [-]

You can chose to see it as astroturfing, or see it as people actually thinking the superlatives are appropriate.

To be honest, it makes no difference in my life if you believe or not what I'm saying. And from my perspective, it's just a bit astounding to read people's takes that are authoritatively claiming that LLMs are not useful for software development. It's like telling me over the phone that restaurant X doesn't have a pasta dish, while I'm sitting at restaurant X eating a pasta dish. It's just weird, but I understand that maybe you haven't gone to the resto in a while, or didn't see the menu item, or maybe you just have something against this restaurant for some weird reason.

	▲	mrwrong 15 hours ago \| parent [-]
		X has a pasta dish is an easily verifiable factual claim. the pasta dish at X tastes good and is worth the money is a subjective claim, unverifiable without agreeing on a metric for taste and taking measurements. they are two very different kinds of disagreements

▲

gldrk 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

'It's $CURRENTYEAR' is just a cheap FOMO tactic. We've been hearing these anectodes for multiple current years now. Where is this less buggy software? Does it just happen to never reach users?

	▲	otabdeveloper4 a day ago \| parent [-]
		Just two more LLM models and two more prompt optimizations.

▲

heliumtera 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"high quality results". Yeah, sure. Then I wanted to check this high quality stuff by myself, it feels way worse than the overall experience in 2020. Or even 2024.

Go to docs, fast page load. Than blank, wait a full second, page loads again. This does not feel like high quality. You think it does because LLM go brrrrrrrr, never complains, says your smart. The resulting product is frustrating.

▲

otabdeveloper4 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Yikes.