I'm becoming more convinced these are questions of the Before Times. Yes, yes—heresy, I know.

Yet, I can't deny the reality that I observe working with LLMs every day. If this truly is a step-function (as some are sgguesting), then I have absolutely zero concern for the quality of the code.

▲

fwip 5 days ago | parent [-]

Kind of a circular argument, isn't it? "Some people are saying it's very good at coding. If that's true, I don't care if the code is good."

	▲	adamtaylor_13 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		I didn't say I don't care if the code is good. I said I had zero concern for the quality of the code. That is, I do not have concern that the quality of the code will be a concern in and of itself. It's a subtle, but IMO important difference. We only care about code quality so as it gives us stable, understandable systems. Historically that meant a human had to read and understand it. Suppose a future where that's no longer the case, then we may still end up with stable, understandable systems without understanding every minutiae of the substrate. It's the same way I don't really know if my compiler is correct, but the behavioral patterns of my code suggest it is without me understanding anything about its code quality.