William_BB

> It's better then incompetents code, worse then a motivated average dev...

That's well put.

> But good enough hence the real question is value aka time& money invested/quality.

There's time invested SO FAR and time that will have to be invested to maintain it. In my experience, even with Fable, it's not there yet. It's the reason why it's easy to vibe code an app from scratch, but at some point when complexity significantly increases, the codebase becomes a mess.

> I think "absolute crap but still useful to me" is a pretty high value and not worth neglecting

If I extrapolate this example to my professional life, this code now manages millions of dollars, a single mistake can wipe it all out, it has to be maintained by 5 other engineers and understood by 5 other domain experts.

AI is great at reducing the search space and using human-like reasoning (in a brute-force way) to carry out the brute-force search. I'm not surprised by this result. This is exactly what AI should excel at, with human guidance.

There's a big difference between one shotting a counterexample using AI and using AI to find a counter-example by brute-force.

Both are impressive, of course, but they're hardly comparable.

> has fewer bugs

who claimed that? Are you suggesting that the rewrite did not introduce any new bugs? The correct answer is, by the way, that no one knows since it's millions of lines of code no one has properly read.

> smaller, faster

I thought this has already been debunked. You could just write better zig and make it smaller, faster (and have fewer bugs!)

It's not even about requirements. It's about responsibility. Someone has to take responsibility for the code and the product. Someone has to hotfix a bug that's costing millions of dollars an hour and someone has to be blamed for a bug that's consting millions of dollars an hour.

Ever heard of the infinite monkey theorem?

This is basically what LLMs do on really hard tasks. Prompt it a million times on a really hard problem and it might output the correct answer once.

People will downvote you because this comment is "not appropriate" for HN, but there were countless conversations on HN about how important these benchmarks are.

I am literally LOLing at HN right now

> AI is also scarily good at writing tests

:-) I hope you read those tests before claiming it's "scary good"

> This is a forum filled with experts

Half of HN commentators probably work on basic CRUD. Armchair experts, maybe.

This is such a bad take. I'm impressed how often this gets parroted online.

Next time, please check how many Poles left Poland for western EU since they joined.

yeah. In the future when? 2, 3, 5 years from now on? Do you think current LLMs don't get confused by shitty code?

That code they're writing now will need fixing tomorrow, not 5 years later.

I have the same feeling ever since his infamous LLM OS post