The world at large does accept LLM-derived code as comparable. The same cannot be said for driving v. running 26 miles.

I think the analogies are not helping us. This started by comparing LLMs to performance enhancing drug being used within the same sport.

But software engineer, as a job rather than a hobby, has always been about results. Hence my original point.

Hence my confusion. I am not perusing my hobbies for “the world at large” I’m perusing them for myself; being able to drive 26 miles makes no difference to me nor to the others who wish to run it.

▲

nickorlow an hour ago | parent [-]

I think many people derive joy from hobbies because they get a unique skill as a result of time invested. If the Philadelphia marathon started giving out medals to people who drive the course in a car, I think less people would want to run it.

▲

_aavaa_ 34 minutes ago | parent [-]

I agree, but they would move on to another marathon that didn’t hand out prizes to drivers.

People who continue to do the hobby without LLMs will still get unique skills, like woodworkers who don’t use power tools.

I understand that this is a loss for those who were pursuing programming as a hobby only as long as it gave them a unique skill and made them feel superior to others. However, for better or worse, I can’t bring myself to care about that.

▲

nickorlow 21 minutes ago | parent [-]

Not sure how you got the 'made them feel superior' part.

	▲	_aavaa_ a minute ago \| parent [-]
		I’m not sure what other implication there is. Hobby programming without LLMs and you gain unique skills (you can do the work without power tools). Hobby program with LLMs, you gain unique skills again (you learn how to properly use these models and get to quickly iterate on your design skills). Regardless of what the big labs are saying, there is still a lot of skill involved in creating with them; if only because they don’t read minds so you have the get good at describing your taste and requirements.