| ▲ | ErroneousBosh 43 minutes ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||
> I feel like the folks that believe we can continue to write code by hand are either in denial that LLMs will eventually (if not already) outperform handwritten code, or are in denial that employers will be ok with lower levels of productivity. Cooking a steak and then flushing it straight down the toilet outperforms all the slow and tedious business of eating and digesting it, too. Why should I use an LLM to write code? It cannot do the job I want it to. It cannot type the code I've already written and it cannot generate correct code. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | jader201 37 minutes ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
> Cooking a steak and then flushing it straight down the toilet outperforms all the slow and tedious business of eating and digesting it, too. That would be more equivalent to writing the code and immediately deleting it. Except this code is being deployed, and it is still (mostly) functional, at least functional enough to satisfy your employer (their “hunger” in your analogy). > Why should I use an LLM to write code? It cannot do the job I want it to. Because your employer is convinced that it can do the job they want it to (whether it does the job you want it to do is irrelevant, unless you're the employer, in which case 100% handwrite your code). | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||