jeong_jeong

> You don't need to create a massive company, be a CEO, have a career people admire, etc..

I don’t give a fuck about any of that. I just wanted to code…

The shiny lighting animation that runs on the spinner verb runs at an abysmal fps. 20 fps max, and it stutters quite often for me. Not important functionality wise, but it is quite ugly.

I think one problem with this whole conversation is that “coding” is not one thing, and skill at it can mean many different things depending on the context.

In my experience, the top models still generate tons of useless slop on any non-trivial implementation request that I do not essentially solve in the prompt beforehand (change this class, this function, etc). They also still make trivial errors that no human would make (although the inverse is also true). In this sense, they do suck at coding.

On the other hand, even weaker models can understand large sections of code, come up with correct implementations of changes, and catch non-trivial edge cases in many situations that is obviously better than most devs. In this sense, they are better than almost all human devs, especially when considering the time and cost.

Perhaps in the long term AI will help us distinguish better between different types of coding tasks and programming disciplines

You make a false equivalence between being an idiot/“didn’t know what they were doing” and not knowing how to properly manage memory. Also, why do you think the devs who worked on google chrome weren’t idiots?

Some of the most important and safety critical large scale projects in the history of humanity had/have manual memory management. If you think the effort of doing it correctly is not worth it for certain projects, that may be a reasonable opinion. But the idea that humans cannot write correct C/C++ programs is in direct contradiction to historical fact.

Tbh I think it’s propaganda. A lot of very powerful people are invested in AI adoption.

It’s called hacker news, bro