7 ms·

Why would I read something you couldn't be bothered to write?

yogthos 1mo ago
The real question is why you feel the need to comment on something you don't care to understand. Thanks for admitting you're just trolling and there's no point trying to engage with you.
andsoitis 1mo ago
That's such a knee-jerk, unproductive, smug, uncritical retort. Why?
- cindyllm 1mo ago
  [dead]
- blks 1mo ago
  Tbf, author didn’t really read or write it, why anyone else should
  - yogthos 1mo ago
    I really love how people keep trotting out this straw man man that working with LLMs is just typing a prompt and then having LLM magically produce a working project. In practice, you obviously read the code to understand if it makes sense, and iterate on a solution just as you would when writing it by hand. All you're doing here is exposing the fact that you have no clue how these tools actually work, or how to use them effectively.
    - cstrahan 1mo ago
      It makes me wonder if these same people take issue with task delegation in software development: is it also problematic when a staff engineer delegates tasks across teams, or a senior engineer mentors a junior developer? It's such a stifling, self-limiting belief that it's actually saddening :(. It's also a hypocritical belief: the machine they used to type out these thoughts were assembled in a factory, using CNC, pick-and-place, laser engraving, plastic injection molding, etc. With the exception of a few things (ex: the silicon itself) all of these things could be hand crafted - it would just make the price of computer impractical. Commoditization is a good thing, and automation is necessary for that. I can only imagine that what is actually happening is that these people are attached to the craft of software development, and AI represents a threat to that, just as CNC milling has displaced manual machinists. But then everyone would be better off if they found an appropriate place to vent that frustration (a therapist? a friend? like-minded forum dedicated to AI complaints?), rather than projecting onto (and leveling complaints at) people using AI.
      - blks 1mo ago
        If said staff engineer would then claim junior’s work as his own, then yes. But for an entirely different reason, as well as this whole analogy doesn’t work here.
didibus 1mo ago
I'm a Jolt user and active Clojure user, and I'd say you're right in a sense. The caveat is that this isn't typical AI slop. The author knows the subject deeply, designed the system themselves, has extensive Clojure test suites to validate against, and has basically been working on it 24/7. Can you trust it like a compiler someone spent 7 years writing and knows line by line? Probably not. But it's closer to alpha software than useless slop. As more people use it, we'll find out how robust it is, and whatever issues exist can be fixed as they're found. So ya, I agree you shouldn't be asked to review AI generated code the author didn't review themselves. I think the ask here is more to try it and see how complete and robust it actually is. And even that only makes sense because the author is a known expert who appears to be steering the model carefully.
cstrahan 1mo ago
I am almost certain that, on a daily basis, you use dozens (or hundreds) of things that: 1. Were produced via plastic injection molding. 2. Were machined by CNC. 3. Have PCBs that were fabricated by machine, milled by machine, and populated via pick-and-place machine. 4. Were laser engraved, or silk screened, or printed. 5. For food/foodstuffs: were processed in an automated factory. When you use all of these things, do you complain about using/consuming something that someone "couldn't be bothered to hand craft"? If you don't see/anticipate the utility in a thing (like I don't have any interest in wicker baskets, hand crafted or not), why complain about that thing, instead of just moving along? I'd get it if you wanted to provide constructive feedback, but you can't do that if you're not willing to read the code. Harboring (and expressing) negative sentiment for things that you opt to not be involved in sounds like a recipe for misery, as there's an infinite number of things to actively dislike if you go looking for them: movies/music that aren't to your tastes, mediocre restaurants, cities you wouldn't want to live in, etc.

The real question is why you feel the need to comment on something you don't care to understand. Thanks for admitting you're just trolling and there's no point trying to engage with you.

andsoitis 1mo ago

That's such a knee-jerk, unproductive, smug, uncritical retort. Why?

cindyllm 1mo ago
[dead]
blks 1mo ago
Tbf, author didn’t really read or write it, why anyone else should
- yogthos 1mo ago
  I really love how people keep trotting out this straw man man that working with LLMs is just typing a prompt and then having LLM magically produce a working project. In practice, you obviously read the code to understand if it makes sense, and iterate on a solution just as you would when writing it by hand. All you're doing here is exposing the fact that you have no clue how these tools actually work, or how to use them effectively.
  - cstrahan 1mo ago
    It makes me wonder if these same people take issue with task delegation in software development: is it also problematic when a staff engineer delegates tasks across teams, or a senior engineer mentors a junior developer? It's such a stifling, self-limiting belief that it's actually saddening :(. It's also a hypocritical belief: the machine they used to type out these thoughts were assembled in a factory, using CNC, pick-and-place, laser engraving, plastic injection molding, etc. With the exception of a few things (ex: the silicon itself) all of these things could be hand crafted - it would just make the price of computer impractical. Commoditization is a good thing, and automation is necessary for that. I can only imagine that what is actually happening is that these people are attached to the craft of software development, and AI represents a threat to that, just as CNC milling has displaced manual machinists. But then everyone would be better off if they found an appropriate place to vent that frustration (a therapist? a friend? like-minded forum dedicated to AI complaints?), rather than projecting onto (and leveling complaints at) people using AI.
    - blks 1mo ago
      If said staff engineer would then claim junior’s work as his own, then yes. But for an entirely different reason, as well as this whole analogy doesn’t work here.

didibus 1mo ago

I'm a Jolt user and active Clojure user, and I'd say you're right in a sense. The caveat is that this isn't typical AI slop. The author knows the subject deeply, designed the system themselves, has extensive Clojure test suites to validate against, and has basically been working on it 24/7. Can you trust it like a compiler someone spent 7 years writing and knows line by line? Probably not. But it's closer to alpha software than useless slop. As more people use it, we'll find out how robust it is, and whatever issues exist can be fixed as they're found. So ya, I agree you shouldn't be asked to review AI generated code the author didn't review themselves. I think the ask here is more to try it and see how complete and robust it actually is. And even that only makes sense because the author is a known expert who appears to be steering the model carefully.

cstrahan 1mo ago

I am almost certain that, on a daily basis, you use dozens (or hundreds) of things that: 1. Were produced via plastic injection molding. 2. Were machined by CNC. 3. Have PCBs that were fabricated by machine, milled by machine, and populated via pick-and-place machine. 4. Were laser engraved, or silk screened, or printed. 5. For food/foodstuffs: were processed in an automated factory. When you use all of these things, do you complain about using/consuming something that someone "couldn't be bothered to hand craft"? If you don't see/anticipate the utility in a thing (like I don't have any interest in wicker baskets, hand crafted or not), why complain about that thing, instead of just moving along? I'd get it if you wanted to provide constructive feedback, but you can't do that if you're not willing to read the code. Harboring (and expressing) negative sentiment for things that you opt to not be involved in sounds like a recipe for misery, as there's an infinite number of things to actively dislike if you go looking for them: movies/music that aren't to your tastes, mediocre restaurants, cities you wouldn't want to live in, etc.