Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
Problem is that to be able to decide whether or not to say no to the code you need to be able to reason about it, and to reason about it you need to wrap your head around at least parts of the output of the prolific, not-afraid-of-complexity AI output.
And that takes time! maybe enough time to defeat the alleged benefit of having it written for you in some cases
Erm, it's not cheap...
Within the context of the article, I think it is completely fair to say that creating code is cheap compared to the cost of understanding that code.
TL;DR:
He proposes to code review the LLM generated code.
Summary:
AI generates code fast with decent quality, but the code is only part of the whole solution/system.
The LLM is a dangerous tool if left alone, because left alone means no one understands the system. The LLM will just generate on top of this "decent" quality code, which doesn't seem of "decent quality" anymore the further we read this prose.
This adds "complexity", to a point where the system collapses.
His solution is to review what the LLM is suggesting instead of YOLO.
