[medvezhenok]

Sure, but LLMs tend to be better at navigating around documentation (or source code when no documentation exists). In agentic mode, they can get me to the right part of the documentation (or the right of the source code, especially in unfamiliar codebases) much quicker than I could do it myself without help.

And I find that even the auto-generated stuff tends to go up at least a bit in terms of level of abstraction than staring at the code itself, and helps you more like a "sparknotes" version of the code, so that when you dig in yourself you have an outline/roadmap.

[heavyset_go]

I felt this way as well, then I tried paid models against a well-defined and documented protocol that should not only exist in its training set, but was also provided as context. There wasn't a model that wouldn't hallucinate small, but important, details. Status codes, methods, data types, you name it, it would make something up in ways that forced you to cross reference the documentation anyway.

Even worse, the model you let it build in your head of the space it describes can lead to chains of incorrect reasoning that waste time and make debugging Sisyphean.

Like there is some value there, but I wonder how much of it is just (my own) feelings, and whether I'm correctly accounting for the fact that I'm being confidently lied to by a damn computer on a regular basis.

[embedding-shape]

> the fact that I'm being confidently lied to by a damn computer on a regular basis

Many of us who grew up being young and naive on the internet in the 90s/early 00s, kind of learnt not to trust what strangers tell us on the internet. I'm pretty my first "Press ALT+F4 to enter noclip" from a multiplayer lobby set me up to be able to deal with LLMs effectively, because it's the same as if someone on HN writes about something like it's "The Truth".

[heavyset_go]

This is more like being trolled by your microwave by having it replace your meals with scuba gear randomly.