@tante By now I’m pretty convinced llms can make it easier to produce high quality code then writing high quality code manually. Particularly because the AI is willing to do all the tedious, borring tasks that most developers are often to lazy for. Yes, it also makes it much easier to produce shittier code as well. (1/2)

Right now we are seeing way more of the latter because most people haven't learned yet how to produce good AI code and because the bad code sticks out while the good code blends in. But I'm convinced your underlying assumption “AI code = shitty" isn't correct. (2/2)
@tante

@343max @tante
Then, Max, you have no understanding of LLM/Gen AI, or maybe of specifying requirements, designing system (modules, APIs etc) and then writing the code test & debug. If it's any size of project you need a team & management.
There is also documentation.
Actually writing the code is the easiest bit & the only bit the current LLM/Gen AI does, and does badly as it relies on code scraped from elsewhere & statistical shuffling of fragments.
Can't work. It's a technological dead end.

@raymaccarthy @tante Oh the “someone disagrees with me so they must be stupid" argument! Amazing. Please go away now.

@343max @tante
I've designed & written SW for decades and done physical AI courses as well as studying it.
What's your qualification for your amazing claims Max?
Expert systems was AI in 1980s and relied on good design and curation of the knowledge of experts. It was too expensive to build and fragile.
I forecast the the idea of LLM 20+ years ago. Chatbots then had data encoded in the program (Eliza, ALICE etc). I suggested a statistical engine and using the Internet as data. A toy.