Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> These are not just research papers, people are reproducing these results all over the place. Another example from a few minutes ago: https://x.com/DimitrisPapail/status/1868710703793873144

Maybe I'm not making myself clear, but when I said "demonstrating that X new tech can increase Y metric by Z%" that of course included reproduction of results. Again, this is not relevant to what I'm saying.

I'll repeat some of what I've said in several posts above, but hopefully I can be clearer about my position: while LLMs can generate code, I don't believe they can satisfactorily replace the work of a senior software engineer. I believe this because I don't think there's any viable path from (A) an LLM generates some code to (B) a well-designed, complete, maintainable system is produced that can be arbitrarily improved and extended, with meaningfully lower human time required. I believe this holds true no matter how powerful the LLM in (A) gets, how much it's trained, how long its context is, etc, which is why showing me research or coding benchmarks or huggingface links or some random twitter post is likely not going to change my mind.

> I'd also add that we probably don't want huge sprawling code bases

That's nice, but the reality is that there are lots of monoliths out there, including new ones being built every day. Microservices, while solving some of the problems that monoliths introduce, also have their own problems. Again, your claims reek of inexperience.

Edit: forgot the most important point, which is that you sort of dodged my question about whether you really think that "ask ChatGPT" is sufficient to generate requirements or validation criteria.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: