14
15

"A" for "Average" (stitcher.io)

eingereicht von brendt_gd

Alle 12 Kommentare
sortiert nach:
beste
TopNeuKontroversAltq&a
FormatierungshilfeVerstecke die HilfeNoun: Inhaltsrichtlinien

[–]webMacaque 13 Punkte14 Punkte  (2 Kinder)

I share the same view. Moreover, I made a personal observation. Mediocre prograers are satisfied by the output of LLMs, while above average developers are not.

I know it makes me sound like an arrogant asshole, but this seems like truth to me, I am sorry.

[–]Fredidiah 2 Punkte3 Punkte  (0 Kinder)

Agree. My experience has been that AI output is only usually considered “good” when you are working with something where you are unable to actually discern quality output from bad output. (IE: a subject you don’t know about)

I find that when I DO know about the subject, LLM tools mostly create things that require significant further correction on my part – so much so that I’d rather just write it myself.

These tools seem to be a huge help to people who are either unable to discern between good and bad output OR people who don’t care and a hindrance to everyone else.

[–]kokoshkatheking 0 Punkte1 Punkt  (0 Kinder)

I would add that ai could suggest the best next and the worse at the same time.
I love to challenge what I do with AI (and argue with it from time to time), but this continually show me the limitations of LLM when they go full retard, or propose an extremely complicated solution for something that could be an easy fix.

[–]brendt_gd[S] 8 Punkte9 Punkte  (1 Kind)

Hi folks, this isn't my usual deep-dive into PHP content, yet it's a thought that has been on my mind for a while, and I'm curious to hear your thoughts about it as well.

The tl;dr is that AI, by design, always comes to average solutions, and we shouldn't forget about it. I dive into it some more in the post.

[–]ByteMender 0 Punkte1 Punkt  (0 Kinder)

"Average Intelligence"...that sounds like a much better name tbh.

[–]Davekuh 4 Punkte5 Punkte  (1 Kind)

An LLM's output is only as good as its input. You need to understand the language and the problem for the LLM to come up with a good solution. It's not that different from managing junior developers. For me, I don't let the LLM decide the solution, I only let it write the code, like I would do with junior developers in my team.

[–]HypnoTox 3 Punkte4 Punkte  (0 Kinder)

Exactly this. It's a stubborn junior to mid level dev, depending on the context, it still really sucks at software architecture and maintainable code if you don't enforce it and give it guardrails to develop against.

[–]riggiddyrektson 4 Punkte5 Punkte  (0 Kinder)

In most projects I work on, average is an improvement

[–]Half_Body 1 Punkt2 Punkte  (1 Kind)

Two points: - actually many times I have been impressed when ai suggests clever solutions and writing clean code in my favourite language. - average are more than enough for a lot of things, in any given system I’m ok if 80% of code is average, and 20% which critical modules are better. 

[–]kokoshkatheking 0 Punkte1 Punkt  (0 Kinder)

I agree with you. The thing is that a valuable app needs some parts which are not average, so one needs to be well aware for the underlying code to be able to act when needed. This makes me weary of agent coding as “accept without understanding” is an easy way out.
I I know that I’m supposed to not do that but I’m afraid that I would not resist the temptation :)

[–]gullevek 0 Punkte1 Punkt  (0 Kinder)

The crap that Google “AI” slops out for every search is the cherry on the shit pudding.

[–]iTiraMissU 0 Punkte1 Punkt  (0 Kinder)

It depends on the project. For a personal project I’m never going to share AI can write the worst code ever, as long as it works. For commercial and OSS projects, constant babysitting.