zlacker

“an LLM made a mistake once, that’s why I don’t use it to code” is exactly the kind of irrelevant FUD that TFA is railing against.

Anyone not learning to use these tools well (and cope with and work around their limitations) is going to be left in the dust in months, perhaps weeks. It’s insane how much utility they have.

>>sneak+(OP)
They won't. The speed at which these models evolve is a double-edged sword: they give you value quickly... but any experience you gain dealing with them also becomes obsolete quickly. One year of experience using agents won't be more valuable than one week of experience using them. No one's going to be left in the dust because no one is more than a few weeks away from catching up.

>>sneak+(OP)
Looking forward to seeing you live up to your hyperbole in a few weeks, the singularity is near!

>>sneak+(OP)
Once? Lol.

I present a simple problem with well defined parameters that LLMs can use to search product ingredient lists (that are standardized). This is the type of problems LLMs are supposed to be good at and it failed in every possible way.

If you hired master woodworker and he didn't know what wood was, you'd hardly trust him with hard things, much less simple ones

>>breule+u1
Very important point, but there's also the sheer amount of reading you have to do, the inevitable scope creep, gargantuan walls text going back and fourth making you "skip" constantly, looking here then there, copying, pasting, erasing, reasking.

Literally the opposite of focus, flow, seeing the big picture.

At least for me to some degree. There's value there as i'm already using these tools everyday but it also seems like a tradeoff i'm not really sure how valuable is yet. Especially with competition upping the noise too.

I feel SO unfocused with these tools and i hate it, it's stressful and feels less "grounded", "tactile" and enjoyable.

I've found myself in a new weird workflowloop a few times with these tools mindlessly iterating on some stupid error the LLM keeps not fixing, while my mind simply refuses to just fix it myself way faster with a little more effort and that's a honestly a bit frightening.

>>sneak+(OP)
Surely if these tools were so magical, anyone could just pick them up and get out of the dust? If anything, they're probably better off cause they haven't wasted all the time, effort and money in the earlier, useless days and instead used it in the hypothetical future magic days.

>>sensan+vn
> Surely if these tools were so magical

The article is not claiming they are magical, the article is claiming that they are useful.

> > but it’ll never be AGI

> I don’t give a shit.

> Smart practitioners get wound up by the AI/VC hype cycle. I can’t blame them. But it’s not an argument. Things either work or they don’t, no matter what Jensen Huang has to say about it.

>>sneak+(OP)
I see this FOMO "left in the dust" sentiment a lot, and I don't get it. You know it doesn't take long to learn how to use these tools, right?

>>creata+9z
it actually does if you want to do serious work.

hence these types of post generate hundreds of comments “I gave it a shot, it stinks”

>>bdangu+Gz
I like how the post itself says "if hallucinations are your problem, your language sucks".

Yes sir, I know language sucks, there isnt anything I can do about that. There was nothing I could do at one point to convince claude that you should not use floating point math in kernel c code.

But hey, what do I know.

>>worthl+kH
Did saying to Claude "do not use floating point math in this code" not work?

>>simonw+wH
Correct, it did not work.

>>kossTK+Cc
I relate to this a bit, and on a meta level I think the only way out is through. I'm trying to embrace optimizing the big picture process for my enjoyment and for positive and long-term effective mental states, which does include thinking about when not to use the thing and being thoughtful about exactly when to lean on it.

>>malfis+t5
You haven’t shared the chat where you claim the model gave you incorrect answers, whilst others have stated that your query returned correct results. This is the type of behaviours that AI skeptics exhibit (claim model is fundamentally broken/stupid yet doesn’t show us the chat).