I disagree that AI has broken the proxies.

Football analogy; AI is the wide receiver and the human is the quarterback. Even if you're the best WR in the game you're still not producing touchdowns unless you have a decent QB.

It's super easy to smell vibe coded projects.

All of these proofs and vibe code are impossible without human work. Call me when GPT whatever writes gcc from scratch

▲

BoxFour a day ago | parent [-]

This is a good point but probably not in the way you intended.

If AI is the wide receiver, it’s perceived currently by many to be an absolutely elite top-tier receiver.

Especially at lower leagues, QBs who have these clearly elite WRs are discounted and considered more-or-less replaceable all the time, because “anyone could throw the ball to Megatron 2.0”.

See, for example, Graham Harrell at Texas Tech: Paired with Michael Crabtree, put up insane numbers, went undrafted. Shedeur Sanders is another more controversial recent example.

It’s definitely not a guarantee that people will see the QB as valuable if the WR is that good.

▲

vatsachak a day ago | parent | next [-]

I guess I was thinking about the NFL but you're right about college.

Your point also extends the analogy, the AI might seem enough at lower levels due to that reason

▲

Catloafdev a day ago | parent | prev [-]

People can sniff out LLM generated stuff relatively quickly, the WR raises the floor.

The bar just took a very noticeable jump that people are still adjusting to.

Anything the WR can do on it's own is often seen as 'AI slop' - so now what matters is the QB. Because any random junk QB that doesn't meaningfully improve the WR's output is indistinguishable from AI slop. The distinguishing factor is solely the QB.

▲

BoxFour a day ago | parent [-]

> Anything the WR can do on it's own is often seen as 'AI slop'

This has not been my experience inside of a FAANG, in fact rather the opposite: People have been getting praised for AI slop because they can produce it quickly and it’s “good enough”.

The pendulum is slowly starting to swing back a little bit, but mostly because people have realized there’s effectively infinite noise now and doing anything, regardless of how skilled of a QB you are, is not being rewarded.

▲

Catloafdev a day ago | parent [-]

I'm not saying "LLM's are only capable of AI slop."

We're specifically talking about the context of 'LLM-aided human output' not about general capability of these systems.

▲

vatsachak a day ago | parent [-]

An interesting example was the neomacs post on the frontpage yesterday.

https://neomacs.org

Some buttons on the front page don't even work.

And then you have Joachim Breitner using Claude Code to produce Soundness proofs in Lean4, mostly vibe coded.

It really is the QB in charge methinks

	▲	evalexec 13 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Thank you for the feedback, I'm busy on the development of neomacs, so I didn't well polish the neomacs's landing page. I have updated the neomacs's landing page, make the "work in progress" indicator more prominent. Also, I'm working on using neomacs's wasm build as neomacs's landing page: https://eval-exec.github.io/neomacs/
	▲	evalexec 13 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		neomacs is still in it's very early of development。 I believe that, after continuous multiple iterations of development/test， neomacs will undoubtedly become excellent software。