[CamperBob2]

Funny, that's what I said, as an experienced assembly hacker, when somebody first showed me a C compiler.

People who "take the time to really understand the code" will rapidly be outcompeted by people who don't. You don't like that, I don't like that, but guess what: nobody cares.

I suppose we'll get over it, eventually, just like last time.

[s_ting765]

LLMs are not compilers. They can't be deterministic. A better comparison is an autocorrect on steroids.

And I don't think there's anything to get over about them. They are useful but people elevate their significance too much over what they actually are.

[CamperBob2]

An unhealthy attachment to determinism will turn out to be a career-limiting hangup, I suspect. You already lack insight into how 100% of the code in your project works, unless you only work on trivial projects. Did you think that state of affairs was going to get better with time? As usual, TDD covers a multitude of sins.

As for "autocorrect," let us know when your "autocorrect" takes gold at the International Math Olympiad, with or without steroids.

[s_ting765]

Talk is cheap. Give your LLM/agent your badge and let it turn in 100% of your job.

[CamperBob2]

That'd be awesome. Not going to happen this week or this year, but it will.

[piperswe]

Enjoy being unemployed then, I guess?