← Back to context

Comment by fragmede

5 hours ago

> After working with agent-LLMs for some years now, I can confirm that they are completely useless for real programming.

"completely useless" and "real programming" are load bearing here. Without a definition to agree on for those terms, it's really hard not to read that as you're trying to troll us by making a controversial unprovable claim that you know will get people that disagree with you riled up. What's especially fun is that you then get to sneer at the abilities of anybody making concrete claims by saying "that's not real programming".

How tiresome.

Who cares about semantics.

Ultimately it all boils down to the money - show me the money. OAI have to show money and so do its customers from using this tool.

But nope, the only thing out there where it matters is hype. Nobody is on an earnings call clearly showing how they had a numerical jump in operating efficiency.

Until I see that, this technology has a dated shelf life and only those who already generate immense cash flows will fund its continued existence given the unfavourable economics of continued reinvestment where competition is never-ending.

  • The "real programming" people are moving the goalposts of their no true scotsman fallacy so fast they're leaving Roadrunner style dust behind them.

    Yes, there are things LLMs can't do at all, some where they are actively dangerous.

    But also there are decently sized parts of "software development" where any above average LLM can speed up the process as long as whoever is using it knows hot to do so and doesn't fight the tool.

    • Who cares. Focus on what matters. OAI knows this considering they are dedicating a lot of their resources toward figuring out how to become profitable.

agreed. we should instead be sneering at the AI critics because "you're holding it wrong"