Comment by leptons
1 day ago
>Yes, because human-made code is risk-free.
If whataboutism is all you have, this conversation is over.
> I suggest you actually look at a codebase of a proprietary device before forming a proper opinion
You have no idea what codebases I've seen and worked in, so don't assume I have not. My opinions are well-formed.
>You have no idea what codebases I've seen and worked in, so don't assume I have not.
Why not? You've been quite confortable assuming things so far, without actually contributing anything of substance to the conversation. Your opinions may even be well-formed, but if they are, your communication skills clearly aren't.
So, how has been your experience using LLMs as a maker (the actual topic) or in the context of IoT development (the topic I was replying to)? Mine has been quite positive, ranging from ensuring specific blocks of assembly code are deterministic (instead of having to check dozens of pages in a manual, and count instructions at every adjustment), to building both code, test fixtures and build infrastructure, to generating documentation, to actually hunt and fix security and logic issues on older codebases.
When people read "vibecode" they assume a clueless intern operating Cursor without any idea of what he's doing (in part because of the overhype of misshaps of LLM-generated code), opposed to the old fox with decades of experience that knows every detail by heart. Thing is, the clueless intern will produce much better code with LLMs than without (and fewer defects, too), and the old fox will produce much more because it will delegate some tasks to coding agents instead of less senior team mates,and have results in hours, not weeks.
I told you this conversation is over.