|
|
|
|
|
|
by creesch
952 days ago
|
|
|
> It knows more languages, more tricks, more libraries, more error codes, is faster, cheaper, etc. True up until the point that you want to do something that hasn't really be done before or is just not as findable on the internet. LLMs only know what is already out there, they will not create new frameworks or think up new paradigms in that regard. It also is very often wrong in the code it outputs, doesn't know if things got deprecated after the training data threshold, etc. As a funny recent example, I asked ChatGPT for an example using the openAI nodejs library. The example was wrong as the library has had a major version bump since the last time the training data was updated. > The only area that I still feel superior to ChatGPT is that I have a better understanding of the "big picture" of what the program is trying to accomplish and can help steer it to work on the right sub-problems. Which probably is based on your general experience and understanding of programming in the last 30+ years. As I have said elsewhere, I really don't think that LLMs in their current iteration will be replacing developers. They are however going to be part of the toolchain of developers. |
|
|
Today I asked it a question and it was wrong.... then it ran the code, got the same error as me, and then fixed it (and correctly explained why it was wrong), without me prompting further :)
Really though, how long until that training update goes from every so often, to constant. Now that half the internet is feeding it information, it doesn't even need to scour other sources -- its becoming its own source, for better or worse.