Humans aren't deterministic. Determinism is a red herring. There are lots of other problems with agentic programming, but this is not at the top of the list.

▲

FeteCommuniste 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Humans aren't deterministic

Thus why we replaced computers (flesh and blood people writing out calculations) with computers (silicon-based number-crunching machines).

▲

7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

hadi121 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I agree with the humans aren't deterministic, but I feel like that wasn't the scope of the original commentator. Humans are not deterministic, yes. Neither are LLMs. Both should be phased out of processes that need to be deterministic. What do you think?

▲

derdi 7 hours ago | parent [-]

I don't think processes have to be deterministic. Results should be, in the following sense: Both humans and LLMs should write software that is well-written, well-tested, well-documented, and that meets the spec. But this still leaves a lot of room for creativity (or rolling dice).

	▲	hadi121 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Oh yeah totally agree

▲

Terr_ 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

"Humans don't always sum two integers correctly. Getting the correct sum is a red herring! There are lots of other problems with my beehive-based calculator [0], but that is not at the top of the list..."

It doesn't matter what we are, what matters is what we want, and whether what we built actually works the way we want it to work.

[0] Discworld's Ponder Stibbons would be rolling in his, grave, or more likely his "Early Death package" pocket-dimension jar.

	▲	4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		[deleted]
	▲	derdi 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		See my reply to the sibling. Yes, it matters that the outcome is a working system! It doesn't matter whether the system was created by a human pressing keys on a keyboard.