But you can still do that, much easier, with plain human words.

/yes I know a coding language is 100% better at expressing algorithmical logic, but it is definitely harder for humans to comprehend and express cleanly at a consistent rate. machines do that way better/

▲

duskdozer 11 hours ago | parent | next [-]

No, it's actually much, much harder unless you are ignoring any of the details, which are the things that actually matter ultimately. When you were first learning did they not do the "tell me how to make a PB+J sandwich" or whatever to show you the imprecision of plain human words? You may comprehend the LLM I/O easily, but you don't know that that matches what's actually happening.

▲

aldanor 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's like saying who likes to ride a bicycle in the world of cars, you can do it much easier with a plain steering wheel.

Well... sure it's more efficient (although in some cities and certain routes it's not; same with coding and LLMs). But some of us just love riding the bicycle and enjoying the nature, you know. Perhaps even strengthening our muscles as we do it, as a healthy side effect.

▲

Matl 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> but it is definitely harder for humans to comprehend and express cleanly at a consistent rate

Part of the skill and joy of programming is to constantly work on improving my ability 'to comprehend and express cleanly' my intent in code.

I'd argue LLMs are anything but consistent.

▲

dylanowen 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I definitely comprehend coding language better/faster when I want to fully understand a program. I usually skip docs and go to the sources when possible. I think it's deeper than just the code though, the biggest thing I haven't seen in using natural language is good organization to express the program.

▲

cautiouscat 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think the premise is that yes, you can do that. However many don’t and many in larger corps are pushed expressly to not work that way.

▲

Yoric 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> But you can still do that, much easier, with plain human words.

Not really? In my experience, to get anything precise done, you have to fight the LLM every step of the way. And then when you come back after a few days, you realize that it has overwritten the carefully crafted code or data structures.

▲

thunky 9 hours ago | parent [-]

> And then when you come back after a few days, you realize that it has overwritten

1. Review what it writes as it writes it

2. Give it a smaller, more focused, scope to make changes

Or, keep vibing but then don't get mad about it.

▲

Yoric 9 hours ago | parent [-]

Oh, if I had the ability to do these things, agents would be much nicer to use.

Sadly, at my current company, this doesn't seem to be acceptable practice.

	▲	tome 9 hours ago \| parent [-]
		What do you mean? Because management says it makes you too slow? Or is it unacceptable for some other reason?

▲

q3k 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> But you can still do that, much easier, with plain human words.

Skill issue.

	▲	lolakutty 9 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Luck issue.. If you are lucky, your question have a good representation in the training material and the randomness is on your side.. But the LLM won't tell you that, so until you test your luck by taking the answer from LLM and using it, you never know.. But then, the AI company would have run off with your token payments...