DE:
Ich bereite mich gerade auf die Prüfung IREB Requirements Engineering – Foundation Level (CPRE-FL) vor. Diese Prüfung erscheint mir schwieriger als erwartet.
EN:
I am preparing for the exam for the IREB Requirements Engineering – Foundation Level (CPRE-FL). The exam appears to be harder than expected.
When we use words like "introspection", "hallucination", "understand", "discover", and so on when we're talking about LLMs, we make a dangerous mistake. LLMs have no consciousness, agency, nor self-awareness, and using such terms can make it seem like they do.
(Even "writing code" hits different than "generates code".)
This isn't a pro- or anti-AI comment, it's a truth vs. lying (perhaps to oneself) comment. How we (especially the sellers of trained models) talk about these statistical token generators affects how/when/if we use them and what we expect of them.
Agent-driven development looks fast.
But here’s the problem: code is getting cheap. Confidence isn’t.
I’m seeing teams ship more, test more, generate more — and still lose control over architecture, quality, and long-term maintainability.
This is not a tooling problem. It’s a standards problem.
https://www.the-main-thread.com/p/agentic-sdlc-java-teams-trust-quality-standards
Ted M. Young
Markus Eisele