| ▲ | andrepd an hour ago | |
> my cognitive surrender to the model is increasing too. Why check it? It's obviously going to be correct. I use "frontier" AI models daily at day_job. I can confidently say that anyone who is satisfied with the output of LLM code (enough to commit it straight off) is just an absolutely shit programmer. Sorry but I don't have any other way to put it. The code is (with rare exceptions) atrocious on every level. It is only not atrocious if you take multiple iterations of "review and correct". >If we find no flaws in the design whatsoever, will we be less careful about the second one? The third one? What about the ten thousandth one? Like the saying goes, if my grandmother had wheels she would have been a bike. LLMs can't even produce quality maintainable code for a trivial web service or whatever. Why are we planning for what we will do when they can "design" 10,000 nuclear power plants without any flaw? | ||