Remix clone Hacker News

new | show | ask | jobs Github

▲

purple-leafy 7 hours ago

I agree. This sentiment is quite tiring and I put it down to one of 3 things:

1) lies and/or cope

2) lack of actual software ability, therefore over evaluating your own skill

3) haven’t actually used LLMs, and want to do a “look at me I’m so unique and different”

I roll my eyes whenever someone says “AI bad” “AI sucks” “AI can’t replace me”

Yeah. Load of

▲

bluefirebrand 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Regarding 2

Isn't it possible that people who think LLMs are awesome at coding are in fact bad at it themselves, leading to them over estimating the LLMs "skill"?

To me it feels like people telling on themselves that they aren't very good

	▲	purple-leafy 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I don’t consider myself an expert, but I’ve been programming for the last 6 years, and of those 6 years I’ve spent almost all my spare time programming during this period except for a 1 year hiatus. This includes personal projects with a decent amount of users, and 1 sold project. I’m not the best programmer, but I wouldn’t say I’m bad at all. Question to you, have you actually used a leading model like Fable when it was available? I did. I was seriously impressed. I’ll be honest I find it hard to take anyone seriously who says they can program better or faster than a model with those capabilities. That has not been my experience. Architecting - yes people are still better overall. LLMs tend to go with the average middle of the road result. But in terms of output, raw speed, and getting something working? No way am I better than an llm. Happy to be enlightened and told I’m completely wrong. Maybe I am an idiot. That is a possibility. But how about I give you a task, and I give Claude that same task, and we compare results against execution speed? I’ll happily be the judge of that.