[ninjin]

> Of course I get downvoted for saying this. HN isn't interested in reality any more.

I suspect that rather many of us are simply just tired of Claude and friends getting shoehorned into any conversation about programming at this point. It is about as fun as the Rust Brigade entering any discussion about C. It adds nothing new to the discussion and it is frankly tiring since we pretty much at any time have a handful of conversations on the front page already covering "AI" topics anyway (counting four at the time of writing this).

[qarl]

Well - except in this conversation it's incredibly relevant. It took six years to do this work when the work is likely mostly mechanical and could have been done much more quickly and safely with an automated system.

I thought automation would be interesting to HN - given the context and the fact it was not used.

[krupan]

An LLM is not a mechanical automated system. A deterministic search and replace would be a mechanical automated system. Clearly it wasn't that simple of a problem though.

[qarl]

> An LLM is not a mechanical automated system.

Pretty sure that's exactly what LLMs in coding harnesses are.

[krupan]

Still not deterministic

[qarl2]

You understand that computer programs are deterministic unless someone explicitly injects non-determinism in them, right?

Even when they implement LLMs.

[qarl2]

To the people downvoting me - I'm sorry, but it's true.

I know ChatGPT seems like it's non-deterministic - but that just a user preference.

The only real issue is if you have many people on the same server, the GPU contention can be non-deterministic in rare cases.

LLMs can be deterministic if you need them to be - it's just that most people prefer the human-like interface.

[Animats]

Right. Six years of work on a grunt job. That's what automation is for.