← Back to context

Comment by augment_me

17 hours ago

Let's say you are developing a product, choose 1:

1) Have a single person vibe together a computationally inefficient solution in 1 month that runs transformers on some backend.

2) Hire a team to work for 2 years to design, perfect, optimize, plan, revise, and architect a solution.

The risk/reward for 1) is extremely better than 2). Given the turnover for entertainment in this day and age it doesn't make sense to do all this complex stuff.

It would be much better to use LLMs to create ordinary programs than to use an LLM over and over to emulate something that's thousands or millions of times more efficient.

  • Thousands or millions of times less energy used is a whole lot better for the environment, too.

> Given the turnover for entertainment in this day and age it doesn't make sense to do all this complex stuff.

are we not talking about the NES?

You can't generalize and say that 1 is better than 2, it depends entirely on what you are developing, for whom and for what purpose. For a one-off dumb thing for a few people 1 is fine, for anything at scale, 2 is likely better.

How do you vibe a transformer solution without the existing real solution, which would be needed to generate the training data.

These are just machines for ripping off existing games/programs with mostly accurate simulations. You can't vibe together a transformer of something that doesn't exist with meaningful control over the results.